So for everyone looking for a job, that keeps getting rejection or crickets I'll give you the following tip.

Most of the first level screen of resumes are done by automated machines that are basically just doing keyword matching. So if you want your resume to get through more of these automated scanners, what you do is create a second page on your resume and cram it with every keyword, and buzzword you can thinking of, like "10 years react experience." "20 years java architect", "AR/VR 5 years", "15 years mobile", etc ,etc.

Then select the text and change it to white. No human being will see it, but the automated scanners will and rocket you to the top of the list.

Your welcome. Now help me get my penguin!

There was a variable named 'isVisible'

Wanted to make it visible

I typed in 'yeah' as a keyword instead of 'true'

🤦‍♂️

Memory just came up from reading another rant about static keyword I wanted to share. Involved a network programming assignment in Java back in my heyday.

Fellow student was told that a static member was shared between every object in a class and decided that they could use that to implement network communication (i.e. if they ran the same java program on different machines, they'd be able to communicate by reading to and writing from the same static fields).

Have a memory of sitting in corner of lab overhearing tutor lose their mind trying to (unsuccessfully) explain why this didn't work.

Today on "How the Fuck is Python a Real Language?": Lambda functions and other dumb Python syntax.

Lambda functions are generally passed as callbacks, e.g. "myFunc(a, b, lambda c, d: c + d)". Note that the comma between c and d is somehow on a completely different level than the comma between a and b, even though they're both within the same brackets, because instead of using something like, say, universally agreed-upon grouping symbols to visually group the lambda function arguments together, Python groups them using a reserved keyword on one end, and two little dots on the other end. Like yeah, that's easy to notice among 10 other variable and argument names. But Python couldn't really do any better, because "myFunc(a, b, (c, d): c + d)" would be even less readable and prone to typos given how fucked up Python's use of brackets already is.

And while I'm on the topic of dumb Python syntax, let's look at the switch, um, match statements. For a long time, people behind Python argued that a bunch of elif statements with the same fucking conditions (e.g. x == 1, x == 2, x == 3, ...) are more readable than a standard switch statement, but then in Python 3.10 (released only 1 year ago), they finally came to their senses and added match and case keywords to implement pattern matching. Except they managed to fuck up yet again; instead of a normal "default:" statement, the default statement is denoted by "case _:". Because somehow, everywhere else in the code _ behaves as a normal variable name, but in match statement it instead means "ignore the value in this place". For example, "match myVar:" and "case [first, *rest]:" will behave exactly like "[first, *rest] = myVar" as long as myVar is a list with one or more elements, but "case [_, *rest]:" won't assign the first element from the list to anything, even though "[_, *rest] = myVar" will assign it to _. Because fuck consistency, that's why.

And why the fuck is there no fallthrough? Wouldn't it make perfect sense to write

case ('rgb', r, g, b):
case ('argb', _, r, g, b):
case ('rgba', r, g, b, _):
case ('bgr', b, g, r):
case ('abgr', _, b, g, r):
case ('bgra', b, g, r, _):

and then, you know, handle r, g, and b values in the same fucking block of code? Pretty sure that would be more readable than having to write "handeRGB(r, g, b)" 6 fucking times depending on the input format. Oh, and never mind that Python already has a "break" keyword.

Speaking of the "break" keyword, if you try to use it outside of a loop, you get an error "'break' outside loop". However, there's also the "continue" keyword, and if you try to use it outside of a loop, you get an error "'continue' not properly in loop". Why the fuck are there two completely different error messages for that? Does it mean there exists some weird improper syntax to use "continue" inside of a loop? Or is it just another inconsistent Python bullshit where until Python 3.8 you couldn't use "continue" inside the "finally:" block (but you could always use "break", even though it does essentially the same thing, just branching to a different point).

1. Apply to as mant jobs as possible daily on dice/linkedin/indeed
using keyword resumes customized by scrapping

2. Filter out low-effort crap companies and filter out recruiters.

3. Post "dice/indeed/linkedin daily decrapified."

Tada! Fewer time-wasters during the job hunt.

4. Bonus: turn into a search engine.

5. Daily double round: turn crap listings and quality listings into AI training sets. Incorporate into search engine.

If industry can use bullshit hiring filters, we can use application filters!

Helped a friend who's currently learning programming in Java
Looked at the slides used to teach them and apparently the teacher explains the "static" keyword as "can be accessed from any function of the class"... Which... Isn't at all what static does
At that point they hadn't started with actual OOP stuff, so I kind of get why they didn't explain what it really does, but why the fuck did they just put down a completely wrong definition?! Instead of just saying "yeah you'll just need that keyword for now, I'll explain it later"

Stories from Gary #000

Short background info:
So I'm working as a game dev for 3 years now and by now I can say that I've seen some shit. Mostly because of one of our game designers, let's call him Gary.

So Gary, from here on called GDG (Game Designer Gary), is a regular game designer (GD). His job is to come up with new game ideas, commission the assets, make sure that translations are done, etc. - simply put, he has to get a lot of shit together before we can start working on a new game.

Would be no problem at all if GDG wasn't lazy as shit and would work for once in his life. No dev really wants to work with him anymore, since he's known for calling a game or any issue "ready for development" even if half the assets or specs are still missing.

Let's move on to a particular situation that happened a couple of months ago.

I had an issue assigned to me, which was about implementing the translations for a new game. As I read the issue and checked if everything I needed was given, I noticed that the most important part was in fact missing - the keywords for the translations.

-.-

So, I called GDG and asked where I could find the keywords, to which he responded "Oh, I'm working on them right now... and by the way I got a weird bug with the translation program. Can you come check it out?". Sigh. I went over to his office, rambling about how I should be able to help him with a program I rarely use and which was written ages ago.
As soon as GDG saw me coming roundbthe corner, he started explaining how the keywords aren't ready yet, since the program to create translations and their keywords won't let him name a translation.

"I can create new translations, but I can't assign a keyword to them."
"Okay, show me what you did", I told him, eager to leave.
He started to type the keyword, which turned out to be huge ass long and immediately I noticed a little counter, like "x/50", directly beneath the text field started to count up with every new character GDG typed. See where I'm going with this? HE WASNT ABLE TO RENAME A TRANSLATION BECAUSE HE WAS TOO LAZY TO FUCKING READ AND CONCENTRATE FOR ONCE. Sorry for that, but even thinking about it gets me angry again.

To some this might sound like nothing, but it really got to me at this point. Maybe it will become more understandable as I post more GDG stories.

tl;dr: A 40 something year old man, who's been working in his job for over 10 years wasn't able to use a program which he daily uses and asks me for help, only to find out he's a complete dipshit.

We really take for granted just how much ergonomics goes into the average user interface that has matured.

Like knowing that when I doubleclick a keyword, I don't want the comma as well to be selected.

Or that when I use a command in the terminal and I press tab I want a list of a specific element type.

Everything has gotten so much better since the 90s !

Golang code review be like

> oh no, you used prohibited `else` keyword

Context? Dosent matter. Its banned, mkay?

Fix? Oh you know its hell to read now

WTH, TIL there's a "friend" keyword in C++

Scala lang is hard to learn(not saying that sucks), but first I don't want to learn this language, I just wanted to use some functions for a hobby project and this project I found on internet had all I need so I just wanted to translate it to Python, using an online Scala compiler I pasted the functions I needed anddddd error can't compile it it, because the functions had some extra things that were not part in the file where functions were, these things check for null values(?) so I was looking into the project where these "keywords" comes from and I can't find it, so after some grep in the project files I found the "keyword" I was able to compile it, also I weird thing about this language is that there is no return keyword

So yes I find this lang not that intuitive (for me at least)

It's nice that more and more languages are introducing async/await syntax, but by the example of Rust in particular I'm starting to wonder why we don't instead introduce this syntax for monads in general?

We could have a keyword (say, `bind`) which unwraps a value from any monad provided that the return value of the function is wrapped in the same monad. The ? operator does something a little similar, and I'll be intrigued whether it can actually be implemented for monads other than Result and Option once GATs are stabilized. In particular in the case of Rust, it would be possible to create a reference counting monad for heap-bound management of objects derived from references.

How many keywords are appropriate to put in a "skills" section on a resume?

Technically I've played with a lot of tech and stacks, and done tiny one offs, tutorials and independent projects but nothing that wasnt more than a day on any one of them.

Basically im fast at picking up a language and api and just rolling with it and getting something done, even without tutorials or tons of googling. Though I find myself constantly relying on manuals and reading apis.

Is this normal or should entry level be familiar with the api of something from the get go?

I see a lot of people say to game the system just to get your foot in the front door past the automated keyword filters and on to an interviews where the real requirements are listed.

But I'd rather not list under the skill section something I only used for all of ten hours in one or two sittings.

Also is it acceptable to list a "learning", "would like to learn/know more of", or "planned skill additions" section?

Also what do I add for extras? "Achievements"? "Volunteer work"? "Hobby projects?", "past times?"
Is any of this seen as necessary or well rounded?

If it is really just about the numbers I'll just go scrape junior and entry level positions and take their keywords and automatically fill out template resumes to automate applying.

Could even use SQLite to store the results and track progress lol.

I've never worked as a professional programmer, but it's the only thing I ever enjoyed doing for 12 hours a day.

Did someone already thought about how color highlight can be better? It's been 4-5 years now that I'm coding on a virtual console that run on iPad with a monochrome code editor. Despite the fact that's remind me the old days when I was 8 years old, that doesn't stop me for coding with it.

I mean, is it really important to know that strings are red and numbers are yellow? How does that help me? They are both literal and behave to the user-content categories.

I was talking with my friend, and he says he likes to know if something is a keyword or an identifier. In C++, a lot of common keywords to define stuff and control the flow are often the first word and easy to spot.

A couple of months ago, I tried Flutter, and the editor can highlight ident blocks and give them different colors, but with Flutter, it's easy to get 10 or more ident levels, Does the color help? Splitting the code does.

I think, there is so much stuff that is more important than coloring the grammar of a language. For instance: knowing if an identifier belongs to which Rust Crate because, It's easy to stack 10 or more dependencies in one file that as better chances of names collisions.

Knowing if an identifier was recognized, if it used, if it's a local, a member, a global, a compiled value or a macro seems more important.

I would like to color block of code that is important or sensible. That will help my coworker about the severity of a particular place in the code.

What do you think?

Question for someone who uses Mongo Atlas Search:

If I'm only interested in autocomplete from the start of the text, which is more performant?

1) standard analyzer + edgeGram tokenizer

2) keyword analyzer + edgeGram tokenizer

I don't see why I should index separate words if I don't care about random positions :/

Thank you