In other words, remember you're a manager and not a nanny. Of course, it doesn't mean you can freely ignore the human factor or empathy. Just don't get overwhelmed by this.

A reminder that small details at declaration can have large impacts on memory layouts.

It's all written oriented toward C++ use. That said I think most of it equally applies whatever the language.

An old one now, but still a very good overview of what C++ ranges brought to the table.

Don't trust the title, it misrepresent the content in my opinion. Still the interview in interesting, it shows quite well all the effort Valve is pouring into the Free Software ecosystem.

Indeed, innovation is far from being a linear process. It's actually messy, the breakthroughs already happened already and we describe it after the facts.

The trend keep being the same... And when the newer models will be trained on FOSS code which degraded in quality due to the use of the previous generation of models, things are going to get "interesting".

OK, this is old so I wish it'd go beyond 2003. Still, that's quite a funny read.

An excellent piece, I like this kind of thinking. It works in fact as several level in your life.

I admit I like CRDTs as well. They really are the foundation of cool use cases. Of course it raises questions related to security to broker properly the sessions between users. Still, it's nice to see them more and more used.

This is indeed one of the big issues of the computer science research community. It's also something of importance in fields relying on simulations... which is almost all scientific fields nowadays. Peer reviewing the paper is well practiced, but the software is another story entirely. It'd require some investment in research... but that's not where we're headed at all.

Very Rust focused, still it's an interesting debate. It gives a good overview of the different types of lock behaviors in case of failures. It's very much advocating for the poisoning approach which is indeed an interesting one (coming with its own tradeoffs of course).

I agree with most of the points here. They make all the difference. The audio is too often underestimated.

Some areas of our industry are more prone to the "fashion of the day" madness than others. Still there's indeed some potential decay in what we learn, what matters is finding and focusing on what will last.

An old one and a bit all over the place. Still, plenty of interesting advice and insights.

A bit too high on the "positive caricature scale" to my taste. That said there's a kernel of truth there, focusing on the developer experience will lead to improved impact.

Shows that you don't always need to put stuff in Box to get dynamic dispatch.

Another illustration of how to use a new type to declare intent for display of values.

Or why it's important to mentor others and not stay in your own bubble.

This is a good way to see that the architecture questions are multi-layered. And yes, in enterprise contexts they go all the way to the company strategy level.