addcninblue

You'll need to configure clangd or ccls correctly with neovim's lsp, which in turn requires your build chain to be clean. It's definitely a huge time sink. Feel free to email me if you have specific issues!

Please also loop me in for a Chicago event!

You're saying that the value of your money in real terms is depreciating.

OP is saying the nominal value persists.

With banking, people care about nominal value.

The lag thing is due to this:

If you type `j` in insert mode, it waits to see if there's a possible `k` following. That's the lag.

There's a setting for how long it waits.

Also, you can add a Goggle-enabled Brave as a search engine in Chrome by using the following url:

    https://search.brave.com/goggles?q=%s+&source=web&goggles_id=https%253A%252F%252Fraw.githubusercontent.com%252Fpreambleai%252Fbrave-goggles%252Fmain%252Fcentrist-news&nav=site

(The %s stands in for the search, and the goggles_id specifies the link above.)

My background is in teaching CS1 courses in undergrad (as a TA).

There have been various studies that agree with you: teaching recursion before iteration seems to have benefits! From my experience, it seems to be extremely unpopular among teachers due to the claim that recursion is "useless in industry". My personal opinion is that learning recursion first is probably a step in the right direction, but I'm curious to hear your thoughts (in terms of their claims of the usefulness of recursion in industry).

You can consider the tower rule for intuition on why this can be true:

    E[X] = E[E[X|Y]]

Essentially, what's happening is that, in E[X|Y], we first "hold" the randomness of Y, then consider the expected value of X for every possible value of Y. Once this is determined, we then take the expectation over all values of Y, which integrates out its effects, leaving us with the expected value of X.

This rule is similar, and arises from the tower rule above.

This is the first I've heard of the "Deep Diver" role. How common is this at companies of varying sizes?

I think both are referencing the phrase "idle words," meaning "empty rhetoric or insincere or exaggerated talk" (from Google).

Is it the expected outcome? I was under the initial impression that the author also noted:

> Overall, this may have been a bit of a disappointment to those who expected to use Generics as a powerful option to optimize Go code, as it is done in other systems languages.

where the implementation would smartly inline code and have performance no worse than doing so manually. I quite appreciated the call to attention that there's a nonobvious embedded footgun.

(As a side note, this design choice is quite interesting, and I appreciate the author diving into their breakdown and thoughts on it!)