mastered in the open blog — burn=materialistic_ROTI + self_discipline
Based on my speculation, hypothesis, imagination and a tiny bit of observation.
Majority of the effective, efficient, productive tech professionals don’t work long hours because they already earn enough. Some of them can retire if they want to.
Some percentage of them quit a big company or a high position, sometimes to join a startup. One of the reasons — already earned enough. See my notes on envy^ffree
Most of them value work-life balance. Half of them put this value not on lips but on legs.
Many of them still choose to work hard because they love what they do, or want to achieve more, not because no-choice. See my notes on envy^ffree
a fixtag is not an atomic item. Instead, a fixtag usually comprise two parts namely the value and the identifier.
The identifier is usually a fixtag-num. Note the fixtag-name is not always unique ! It’s more like a fixtag-descriptor.
“Payload” is not a good term. “pair” is kinda uncommon.
Most of us are more familiar with runtime actions than compiler actions and concepts. Now, mv-semantics complexity is 90% inside compiler and 10% inside runtime action of mv-ctor.
r-val complexity is 100% in compiler concept.
mv-semantics is more part-of-the-fabric, more so than the big-4.
Q: given a sequence of payload values produced from a by-level traversal of a binary tree, could the tree be a BST?
Ashish gave me this question. We can assume the values are floats.
(Not contrived, not practical)
— idea 1:
Say we have lined up the values found on level 11. We will split the line-up into sections, each split point being a Level-10 value.
Between any two adjacent values on level 10 (previous level), how many current-level values can legally fit in? I would say up to 2.
In other words, each section can have two nodes or fewer. I think this is a necessary (sufficient?) condition.
–idea 2: One-pass algo
Construct a BST as we consume the sequence.
Aha — there’s only one possible BST we can build.
Relevant in coding tests like speed-coding, take-home, onsite. Practical knowledge is power !
.. by-key is cleaner, not complicated by the iterator invalidation complexities.
You can save all the “bad” keys, and later erase one by one, without the invalidation concerns. You can also print the keys.
if you were to save the “bad” iterators, then once you erase one iterator, are the other iterators affected? No, but I don’t want to remember.
STL iterator invalidation rules, succinctly has a succinct summary, but I don’t prefer to deal with these complexities when I have a cleaner alternative solution.
std::pair has no pointer field so I thought it needs no meaningful mvctor, but actually std::pair mvctor is defaulted i.e. field-wise move i.e. each field is moved.
If a pair holds a vector and a string, then the vector would be move-constructed, and so does the string.
Q1: So what kind of simple class would have no meaningful mvctor?
%%A: I would say a class holding no pointer whatsoever. Note it can embed another class instance as a field.
Q2: so why is std::pair not one of them?
A: std::pair is a template, so the /concrete/ field type can be a dynamic container including std::string.
All dynamic containers use pointers internally.
Needed in some online coding questions (never in GTD). Suppose stdin data is line-delimited like
2 #a count
, then you can do cin>>myCnt>>myKey>>myVal
The newline and any white spaces are ignored 🙂
Q1: “Here is 90% of the logic” — when is such a documentation complete? Answered at the end.
When we programmers read source code and document the “business logic” implemented thereby, we are sometimes tempted to write “My write-up captures the bulk of the business logic. I have omitted minor details, but they are edge cases. At this stage we don’t need to worry about them”. I then hope I have not glossed over important details. I hope the omitted details are just fine prints. I was proven wrong time and again.
Sound byte: source code is all details, nothing but details.
Sound byte: Everything in source code is important detail until proven otherwise. The “proof” takes endless effort, so in reality, Everything in source code is important detail.
The “business logic” we are trying to capture actually consists of not only features and functionalities, but functional fragments i.e. the details.
When we examine source code, a visible chunk of code with explicit function names, variable names, or explicit comments are hard to miss. Those are the “easy parts”, but what about those tiny functional fragments … Perhaps a short condition buried in a complicated if/while conditional? Perhaps a seemingly useless catch block among many catches. Perhaps a break/continue statement that seems serve no purpose? Perhaps some corner case error handling module that look completely redundant and forgettable, esp. compared to other error handlers. Perhaps a missing curly brace after a for-loop header?
( How about the equal sign in “>=” … Well, that’s actually a highly visible fragment, because we programmers have trained vision to spot that “=” buried therein. )
Let me stress again. The visibility, code size … of a functional fragment is not indication of its relative importance. The low-visibility, physically small functional fragments can be equally important as a more visible functional fragment.
To the computer, all of these functional fragments are equally significant. Each could have impact on a production request or real user.
Out of 900 such “functional fragments”, which ones deal with purely theoretical scenarios that would never arise (eg extraneous data) .. we really don’t know without analyzing tons of production data. One minor functional fragment might get activated by a real production data item. So the code gets executed unexpectedly, usually with immediate effect, but sometimes invisibly, because its effect is concealed by subsequent code.
I would say there are no fine-prints in executable source code. Conversely, every part of executable source code is fine print, including the most visible if/else. Every executable code has a real impact, unless we use real production data to prove otherwise.
A1: good enough if you have analyzed enough production data to know that every omitted functional fragment is truly unimportant.
- cloud: golang and java are the most popular languages
- bigData: java is possibly #1
- ML: java is 2nd or 3rd. Many say python and c++ are the top dogs
intellij (the community version) is much cleaner than eclipse, and no less rich in features.
On a new job, My choice of java ide is based on
1) other developers in the team, as I need their support
2) online community support — as most questions are usually answered there
I think eclipse beats intellij
3) longevity — I hate to learn a java ide and lose the investment when it loses relevance.
I think eclipse beats intellij, due to open-source
)other factors include “clean”
The most popular tools are often vastly inferior for me. Other examples:
* my g++ install in strawberryPerl is better than all the windows g++ installs esp. msvs
* my git-bash + strawberryPerl is a better IDE than all the fancy GUI tools
* wordpress beats blogger.com hands down
* wordpad is a far simpler rich text editor than msword or browsers or mark-down editors
Optional.java is the only important example I know, so I will use it as illustration.
One of the main ideas about value types is that they have no notion of identity (or perhaps their identity is detectable only to JVM not Java applications). In such a world, how could we tell whether variables aa and bb “really” are the same or different?
Q: why avoid locking on value-based objects?
%%A: locking is based on identity. See why avoid locking on boxed Integers
c++ has a smaller community and collective brain power so discussions are more limited.
https://stackoverflow.com/questions/34049186/why-not-lock-on-a-value-based-class section on “UPDATE – 2019/05/18” has a great illustration
Auto-boxing of “33” usually produces distinct objects each time, but could also produce the same object repeatedly. Compiler has the freedom to optimize, just as in c++.
Remember: locking is based on object identity.
Many China colleagues (YH, CSY, CSDoctor, Jenny as examples) say their classmates earn much more than them in the U.S. These colleagues seem to claim their Typical Chinese counterpart earns higher than in the U.S.
Reality — those classmates are outliers. The average salary in China is much lower than U.S. Just look at statistics.
Some of these guys (like CSY) feel inferior and regret coming to the U.S.
— cost of reasonable lifestyle
Many Chinese friends complain that cost level is higher in China than U.S. and Singapore. A young MLP colleague (Henry) said a RMB 500k/year feels insufficient to a Chinese 20-something.
In reality, per-sqft property price is indeed higher in some cities than in the U.S. For almost everything else, China cost level is much lower than in the U.S. Just look at statistics.
https://fiximate.fixtrading.org/ is the best available.
- minimizing market impact
- Percent of Volume
- participation ratio
https://empirica.io/strategies-catalog/pov has a the formula to determine the slice sizes.
I think Symbology is a strict naming convention.
RIC is one symbology. NYSE symbology is well known. RTS also has its own symbology .
For both my son and my own tech learning over the long term, “interest” is not necessarily the best word to capture the key factor.
I was not really interested in math (primary-secondary) or physics (secondary). In college, I tried to feel interested in electronics, analog IC design etc but unsuccessful. At that level, extrinsic motivation was the only “interest” and the real motivation in me. Till today I don’t know if I have found a real passion.
Therefore, the strongest period of my life to look at is not college but before college. Going through my pre-U schools, my killer strength was not so much “interest” but more like keenness — sharp, quick and deep, absorbency…
Fast forward to 2019, I continue to reap rewards due to the keenness — in terms of QQ and zbs tech learning. Today I have stronger absorbency than my peers, even though my memory, quick-n-deep, sharpness .. are no longer outstanding.
Throughout my life, Looking at yoga, karaoke, drawing, sprinting, debating, piano, .. if I’m below-average and clueless, then I don’t think I can maintain “interest”.
- group-of-Processes, …. not group of resources.
- Initially named “Process Containers”
- 2006 started at google
- 2007 “mainlined” into linux kernel
- Not available beyond linux, as far as I know
Q: if an optional is empty, will it remain forever empty?
— An Optional.java variable could but should never be null, as this instance need a state to hold at least the boolean isPresent.
If a method is declared to return Optional<C>, then the author need to ensure she doesn’t return a null Optional ! This is not guaranteed by the language.
https://dzone.com/articles/considerations-when-returning-java-8s-optional-from-a-method illustrates a simple rule — use a local var retVal throughout then, at the very last moment, return Optional.ofNullable(retVal). This way, retVal can be null but the returned reference is never null.
If needed, an Optional variable should be initialized to Optional.empty() rather than null.
–immutability is tricky
- the referent object is mutable
- the Optional reference can be reseated, i.e. not q[ final ]
- the Optional instance itself is immutable.
- Therefore, I think an Optional == a mutable ptr to a const wrapper object enclosing a regular ptr to a mutable java object.
Similarity to String.java — [B/C]
Compare to shared_ptr instance — [A] is true.
- C) In contrast, a shared_ptr instance has mutable State, in terms of refcount etc
- B) I say Not-applicable as I seldom use a pointer to a shared_ptr
— get() can throw exception if not present
— not serializable
— My motivation for learning Optional is 1) QQ 2) simplify my design in a common yet simple scenario
https://www.mkyong.com/java8/java-8-optional-in-depth/ is a demo, featuring … flatMap() !!
L1 cache is usually private to a core. L2 can be private or shared with other cores.
Q: can we control that size?
- container of polymorphic Animals (having vtbl);
- Nested containers; singletons;
- class inheriting from multiple supertypes ..
In these and other OO-modeling decisions, there are many variations of “common practices” in c++ but in java/c# the best practice usually boils down to one or two choices.
No-choice is a Very Good Thing, as proven in practice. Fewer mistakes…
These dynamic languages rely on a single big hammer and make everything look like a nail….
This is another example of “too many variations” in c++.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Memory_refresh explains how DRAM data is lost without refresh …
- 22 – symbol ID source
- 40 – order type
My friend Yifei spent 6+ years in ICG (i.e. the investment banking arm) of Citi Singapore.
- Over 6Y no layoff. Stability is Yifei’s #1 remark
- Some old timers stay for 10+ years and have no portable skill. This is common in many ibanks.
- Commute? Mostly in Changi Biz Park, not in Asia Square
- Low bonus, mostly below 1M
- VP within 6 years is unheard-of for a fresh grad
I feel Citi is rather profitable and not extremely inefficient, just less efficient than other ibanks.
Overall, I have a warm feeling towards Citi and I wish it would survive and thrive. It offers good work-life balance, much better than GS, ML, LB etc
Q: if I declare a huge int array in static memory, will the object file become huge?
This is possibly a QQ nlg pearl, a halo zbs, not GTD
I often need my debugger to step into library source code.
Easy in java:
- jdb — see https://dzone.com/articles/a-practical-guide-to-java-remote-debugging-in-the
- My Intellij project has a library in the form of source-jar. This source code is automatically available to my Intellij debugger… plug-n-play.
c++ is harder. I need to find more details.
- in EclipseCDT, STL source code is available to IDE ( probably because class templates are usually in the form of header files), and debugger is able to step through it, but not so well.
Overall, I feel debugger support is significantly better in VM-based languages than c++, even though debugger was invented before these new languages.
I guess the VM or the “interpreter” can serve as an “interceptor” between debugger and target application. The interceptor can receive debugger commands and suspend execution of the target application.
Deepak told me that Rahul, Padma etc stayed in RTS for many years and became “complacent” and uninterested in tech topics outside their work. I think Deepak has sharp observations.
I notice many Indian colleagues (compared to East European, Chinese..) uninterested in zbs or QQ topics. I think many of them learn the minimum to pass tech interviews. CSY has this attitude on coding IV but the zbs attitude on socket knowledge
–> That’s a fundamental reason for my QQ strength on the WallSt body-building arena.
If you regularly benchmark yourself externally, often against younger guys, you are probably more aware of your standing, your aging, the pace of tech churn, … You live your days under more stress, both negative and positive stress.
I think these RTS guys may benchmark internally once a while, if ever. If the internal peers are not very strong, then you would get a false sense of strength.
The RTS team may not have any zbs benchmark, since GTD is (99.9%) the focus for the year-end appraisal.
These are some of the reasons Deepak felt 4Y is the max .. Deepak felt H1 guys are always on our toes and therefore more fit for survival.