ralphb

> It's also the constant stream of digital nomad influencers on Twitter who sell extremely distorted, rosy, and often times false dreams to indie entrepreneurs like myself.

I believe that all sales are about selling into peoples dreams. I am sure that the false dreams you refer are an extremely good business and a willing market, because - who doesn't want to buy the dream of being a successful entrepreneur?

Ironically, assuming these people are creating products primarily based on their own experiences, there might not be anything false about it - it's just that you've trying to sell into less desirable dreams!

Fundamentally I believe that for me it is impossible to passionately pursue stuff I am not really interested in. This limits the desirability of the dreams I can sell into, and I have come to terms with that. You might even think of this as bad luck.

I've also come to terms with the fact that I have to create for myself first, and any interest I get from other people is purely a bonus. Obviously that doesn't pay the bills :-)

I'm confused and very far from an expert here. What is wrong with parsers, and what is the alternative?

I am almost unhappy to learn that this was a joke. Would have been nice to put a final (personal) nail in the C++ coffin with this insanity. However, I guess it says enough that I did have to dig quite far into the paper to realize whether Bjarne was joking or not.

I've found that a super simple way to parse basic expressions is a recursive descent parser. It is very simple to implement. No need to to break into tokenizer/parser, no need to generate an AST, just evaluate the expression while parsing.

This is well-known, and almost trivial. But because I am curious I looked this up in NR 3rd edition. Section 7.1.5 says

> The steps above that convert a 64-bit integer to a double precision floating-point value involves both a non-trivial type conversion and a 64-bit floating multiply. They are performance bottlenecks. One can instead directly move the random bits into the right place in the double word with a union structure, a mask, and some 64-bit logical operations; but in our experience this is not significantly faster

It goes on to describe a lagged Fibonacci generator which generates values directly as floating point.

That's interesting. My kneejerk reaction to your comment was "no, you don't have a strategy for landing a man on the moon, you have a mission architecture!". But on further consideration there really seems to be a lot of overlap between system architectures and strategies (in the Rumelt sense). Diagnosis, kernel, guiding policies. Seems to fit both domains.

We can talk about the advantages of monorepos, but your questions is phrased in a way that makes me think that you don't see any "trouble" in multiple repositories.

I would encourage you to do some research and keep an open mind.

Coffee dampens appetite. (Drink it black)

I am also a zig newbie. Since zig is a relatively simple language, I've found it easy enough to read and understand what is going on in the zig standard library, even if I don't understand the particular details of some language syntax. Of course experience and background is going to play in here.

The zig standard library does the following to help me:

- Logical, straightforward code, no magic incantations

- Well named variables and functions

- Comments

- Folder structure is easy to navigate

- Easy to find on github - not hidden away

Obviously your mileage may vary.

That's funny. I am old, and I think 3 seconds is unacceptable.

I use zig anyway.

In general I would agree, but (as multiple people pointed out) the zig standard library source code is very accessible.

Hey @nordicengineer, we have a bunch of open positions that might be relevant, and I think we're a pretty good place to work & pretty meaningful. If you're willing to relocate to Odense, Denmark send me an email at <myfirstname>[email protected]. I am not the hiring manager.

That's interesting. Maybe I should work on improving my handwriting. For now I just really love the undo feature, and I specifically use when I look at something I wrote and think "I wont be able to read that in the future" :-)