I’m using 1080p at 144hz. It’s great!

I think that, in many cases, “what” and “why” are very similar to each other or are closely related.

I’ve had an experience like this on more than one occasion - I come into an established code base for the first time. I’m working on a new feature/refactor/bug fix. I am reading through a function that is relevant to me, scratching my head a bit, and thinking “I think I see what this function is doing, but why did they do it such a screwy way?” Often there are no comments to give me any clues.

In the past, I have foolishly changed the code, thinking that I knew better… But what often happens is that I soon discover why my predecessor did something that looked so weird to me. They weren’t stupid - there was a reason for it! And then I end up putting it back…

Point being, in a situation like that the “what” and the “why” are going to have a lot of overlap. So, personally, I try to write comments that highlight assumptions that won’t be obvious from reading the code, external constraints that matter but don’t actually show up in the code, and so on.

I am far from perfect at it and I probably don’t write enough comments. But when I do, I try to write comments that will be reminders to myself, or fill in gaps in context for some hypothetical new person. I try to avoid comments that literally explain the code unless it’s particularly (and unavoidably) complex.

Glory to you and your house!

“Why” comments make more sense as application complexity grows.

You also have to consider interaction of the code with other external systems - sometimes external APIs force you to write code in ways you might not otherwise and it’s good to leave a trail for others on your team (and your future self…) about what was going on there.

C seems like an awfully painful way to write the CRUD apps most of us spend our time on.

And any performance gains would be invisible in most situations where network I/O is the biggest bottleneck (almost) regardless of the language used.

There are teams where I work that are basically using Excel as a database and SharePoint as S3 in automated processes… But at least no one is going to DIE when those things fall over!

The only possible way Microsoft can be this bad at naming things is if they are actively doing it on purpose.

Double dumbass on you!

“Nerdy guy who has trouble with women” has been a decent premise for a story for a long time. It even allows for some character development.

But the way it was handled in TNG with Geordi was terrible. Geordi, and LeVar Burton deserved a lot better than that.

Surely I can’t be the first person to point out that Data is not the “driver” in the sense that he is not at the helm, right? Right???

Data is at Ops - the closest thing the TNG show had to a science station - because he was the Spock-analog.

Basically what I’m saying is that Geordi/Wesley/Ro/unnamed officer (depending on the season/episode) gets to pick the music, not Data!

Yes! Link to the Past is a brilliant game - definitely one of my favorite games of all time.

I second the recommendation of Link’s Awakening and Link Between Worlds since you liked this one so much.

Did the person happen to have a southern accent?

As someone from the south, that’s what “healthy” means when used to describe an amount of something. It means “a lot”.

Also, if you say someone looks healthy you’re basically calling them fat, depending on tone of voice and inflection.