“Adds a and b”?

Sure, not useful. Thats a what, not a why.

“Combined value needed for these outputs”

The “why”. Useful. Shows the purpose, and explains the context it may be used in.

Assuming the “why” is known is the mistake - and one I see from junior and mid level, I dont care what language it is, its the same. Using refactoring code as an example, without context - the why - can cause problems. What may be more efficient for one resulting value being presented can cause issues for others (let’s say precision as an example of why it could be a problem). Failing to include why something is being done is usually what introduces these problems, someone misses a different context than what they are looking at, and that belongs in a comment.

A comment on “why” isn’t just important - for any block of code - it is, IMO, a requirement. I have and will continue to respond with “add comments as to why and resubmit”.

That really depends.

Especially for a function that may see use in a variety of scenarios.

I’m going to be firmly against anyone suggesting against proper comments - which, I’m sorry, but you are by your own statement.

Code will change for many, many, many reasons beyond just refactoring.

Edit: and why it was refactored is important as well.

There are just so many reasons, and yes, I will continue to be against this newer trend of “dont comment, make codes your comments”.

All that is, is a great way to make your code harder to manage later. It doesnt take much effort to explain why you’re doing something.

Not updating comments with code is what I’m talking about - that’s not a comment problem, thats a programmer problem.

If they aren’t updating the “why”, that programmer is the problem, not comments.

I am going to disagree, comments should be an explanation.

The code is what’s being done, a comment should be why its being done.

Go for it!

Also… Reaper.

“Some people do a bad job commenting and updating comments, so lets not do comments” is not an approach that works for me.

Most of my code is at the prototype level. I’m concepting something out, usually paired with hardware.

If someone can’t follow what I’m doing, its going to lead to problems. If a change happens to the hardware being controlled, code will not be good enough on its own.

Rather than being accepting of bad commenting practice, make comments (and updating them properly) part of good practice. In my experience, It saves time in the long run and leads to better code at the end.

As an extensive commenter, I completely agree.

I need to know wtf I was doing, making it convoluted to save a few lines is pointless.

Mod, not admin.

Mod is community level, admin is server level.

10 shot outside of a club in queens, ages 16-20

https://nypost.com/2025/01/02/us-news/at-least-10-wounded-in-mass-shooting-outside-queens-nightclub-sources/

I still have not switched back from Premiere and Resolve though. I don’t trust them.

That is what a lot of folks are still saying (from my purely anecdotal experience).

I don’t think macs are going away FWIW, just saying that its not at all necessary for the overwhelming majority of workflows I’ve come across. Especially with so many internal corp studios being happy with a blackmagic body in their kit.

Wasn’t thinking in terms of gaming, but yeah that’s true. Plus you’ll see Rhino and the like especially with architectural renders, I’m painting with a broad brush here.

Probably still the same today.

Doesn’t change the reality of production though when it comes to audio and video though. Final Cut started getting… Problematic in flow some years back, Adobe started to make moves before they, you know, did what Adobe does, and BlackMagic bought DaVinci about 15 years ago actually.

At this point, the only places I know of that are using final cut or premiere in their workflow do so for legacy reasons. Many have shifted to resolve, which works quite beautifully on Linux. In the smaller shop realm for audio, reaper is king (which also works beautifully on Linux).

The “need” for a Mac there is pure fabrication.

For modeling, pros are probably using Houdini, though I’d say blender just behind that. Both of which - again, Linux.

About the only thing I can think of where pros are consistently using something not Linux friendly in the creative world is photo editing (Photoshop of course).

Now I will say that pretty much anything a pro shop will use will work on a Mac, and that is to me the main reason they are still at the top. Plus the weird Apple fanboy/elitism that developed around it.

At this point I’d call it more of a legacy approach - they definitely still control the space, but the workflow is quite easily accomplished on other systems.

I’d also add many (SO MANY) of the pro audio and video systems out there are also running Linux, so even with sa mac-focused workflow, many of the pros out there are using Linux (often without any clue that they are).

So to me its similar to Windows on the desktop - its not necessarily the best option in all cases, but its often the path of least resistance. As a result, pretty much all of them buy into an Apple ecosystem from the get-go.

Canonical is what’s wrong.

100% accurate.

I’d even say equivalent load - but again, I dont support the foundation, wouldn’t buy a 5 in the first place.

I’d still say you’re better off with a t/m/m even with a few watts of savings.

At least as far as my setup, yeah. Ive got 5th-10th gens, under high loads I’ll see a spike to 80+ watts, the highest is 170W but those have nvidia quadros in them.

Edit: For gpio now I’ll just use an esp32 or something instead.

My only pi usage these days is work stuff, and orangepi is supported there. In terms of arm, also Jetson, but that’s kind of outside the discussion here.

Only at idle.

At peak the sff PCs are going to be at least triple the ~30W of the pi 5.

Edit: You’ll get way more out of the sff though, which is what I was saying. Tiny/mini/micro is my entire self hosted environment (as well as lab and work setup for the most part).

They already had sources which pointed to nothing.

The claims are baseless. I welcome an actual source for their claim - the only response was “But they had an ad company!”.

Meaningless relative to claims.

Sure, but this is youshouldknow not ivegotaconspiracytheory.

Facts are important for a claim like they are making.