Can you easily read the pictured text?
It is upside down and backwards so start at the arrow in the bottom left corner.
The next tweet has black text on white if that is easier for you to look at.
(V3.0)
@AaronBallman @__phantomderp@FelixCLC_@ErisCeleste Whatever syntax is used for contracts, a compiler for C++N that has contracts should parse them and check the syntax correctly even if their effects are ignored.
@AaronBallman @FelixCLC_@ErisCeleste For some of us, this is what we always thought it meant: standard attributes are checked, but don't have to actually do anything, whereas non-standard attributes are parsed as balanced token soup (to find where they end) and ignored if not understood
“It was really important as I’ve worked with the Trevor Project for more than 10 years, and so I don’t think I would’ve been able to look myself in the mirror had I not said anything." https://t.co/4FZgrBkhGK
Oh for Pete's sake, people.
We didn't stop doing Big Design Up Front (BDUF) because it is waterfall. We stopped doing it because it doesn't work well most of the time.
On #AdaLovelaceDay (#ALD), we celebrate, acknowledge and show appreciation for these inspiring women changing the world at #WovenPlanet 👩💻
Interested in working with us? Find out more here 👇
https://t.co/embz8OkUkC
I don't know who needs to hear this but if you are working with a system that makes it easy for you to make mistakes then you are working with a _poorly designed_ system.
@AaronBallman @Cor3ntin@MichaelCaisse As a user I understand that upgrading the compiler may break my code if the compiler is more strictly conforming, or implements a DR. That is why a large number of projects don't use trunk compilers: they pick a version and stick with that until new features are worth the cost.
@AaronBallman @Cor3ntin@MichaelCaisse Yes, it worries me *as a user*. I expect compilers to implement DRs. I find it frustrating when they don't, as I can't write code that uses those features as specified with the DR applied. The committee makes things DR for a reason: it fixes a problem.
Remember: users of your library will look to your tests for examples of how your library can be used, whether or not you want them to do this!
Clearly document which tests can or cannot be used as examples, and make your example-able tests readable!
@DVMirchev @DichOlden "Good" often has to work harder than "evil" because "evil" can cheat, and do bad things. The ends do *NOT* justify the means. Doing bad things is bad. Even if it's for a "good" purpose. Censorship is bad.
This is really disappointing to me. Free speech is the weapon we use to counter disinformation and authoritarian regimes, and prevent discrimination. We must not allow censors to limit free speech.
https://t.co/HSaZni5KB9