361
Programmers, is this accurate
(lemmy.world)
1. Be civil
No trolling, bigotry or other insulting / annoying behaviour
2. No politics
This is non-politics community. For political memes please go to !politicalmemes@lemmy.world
3. No recent reposts
Check for reposts when posting a meme, you can only repost after 1 month
4. No bots
No bots without the express approval of the mods or the admins
5. No Spam/Ads
No advertisements or spam. This is an instance rule and the only way to live.
A collection of some classic Lemmy memes for your enjoyment
You should also really be using the latest chainsaw model with new safety features, but your workplace swears by the gas guzzling piece of shit from 1996
I loved when my IDE would warn me that my code wasn't deterministic unless I used c++11 or newer compilers because previous versions technically didn't define how it should work, so every compiler handled it differently.
And all the times I had to specify C++11 because it had features I needed, and suddenly it was a huge headache because the testing pipeline wasn't REALLY compatible, it just said it was, and then handed it off to manual review. Something I didn't know until 6 months after I started using it...
The new safety features all break down under stress and make the tool as safe as the 1996 piece as soon as you put them in a dangerous environment.
Also, both the new and the 1996 pieces have hidden explosives that were placed there by the new tooling used to build them. Nobody will tell you where they are, you should know that already. Don't hit them.