If you just have 4 cases, I wonder if 4 simple == would have been better.

10400002 || 10400006 || 10400020 || 10400048

If you match specific numbers, it's nice if you can do a search in the project and find the specific number.

Rick and Morty also a multiverse aspect, but they don't overdo it. The Citadel of Ricks was pretty funny.

I think if you fire this laser from earth, it will probably heat up the atmosphere, and contribute to global warming as least, maybe more.

This reminds me of some XKCD explained where Randall Munroe tries to explain what happens if you point laser pointers to the moon:

https://what-if.xkcd.com/13/

@Lensflare I can see wisdom in what you are saying.

I think the decision to use any framework or library needs to be a deliberate one. Doing everything yourself is bad, as you are re-inventing every wheel you use. But using 100+ libraries to do simple stuff is also bad.

@Lensflare Even if jQuery uses proper semantic versioning (they might, i dunno), we still had to replace all old jQuery with the new version. Reason was that some kind of security tool said old jquery was unsafe. And since jQuery likes to deprecate stuff, we had to change a lot of existing code, including many jQuery plugins. If you include all regression testing, this was a pretty big effort, pretty much for nothing.

Deprecated stuff included things like $.isArray. While this function is pretty useless (Array.IsArray does the same), they could also simply leave it in, and not forced everyone using jQuery to update their code.

I think many of these frameworks are made by very dedicated and smart people (smarter then me). But there is no parental supervision. These libraries are not made as a service to the people using then, but because the creators enjoy making them.

I am becoming more and more reluctant to use any framework at all.

On the other hand, Javascript has never has any breaking changes. So it it works once, it keeps working.

Better than all those JS framworks that keep on braking stuff (looking at you jQuery).

Personally, I also love debugging. No stakeholders, no changing requirements. Just unraveling the mystery, and coming up with a fix.

I especially like when after searching for a day, I fix a bug by changing just one character (like a > into a <).

At around 10-12 years old. GW-Basic on an MSX computer. I remember typing programs from books.

I also remember loading games from cassette tape, where you had to type "load" (or something) at the command prompt, and then press play on the cassette player.

But with serious programming, I think it was at university when I was 18 years old.

Reminds me of this xkcd: https://xkcd.com/217/

From what I understand, burnout is essentially a hormone imbalance.

I always look at it in this very dumbed down way: In order to activate yourself, you need a hormone called cortisol. When you have too much stress, your cortisol depletes and you have no energy to do anything.

You can compensate in the short-term with adrenaline (by getting angry), but that is not very practical in the long run.

Solution is to rest well, eat well, and physical exercise. And to accept that recovery takes time.

Reminds me of an article I read a while ago: https://blog.codinghorror.com/the-p...

Learning any new paradigm is very tiresome. It takes time, effort, and enough sleep.

Employers are usually not interested in paying people what they are worth, they are only interested in keeping costs down. This reminds me of an article I read a while ago:

http://bluegraybox.com/blog/2004/...

Given your relationship with your boss, I think you owe it to him to give him a chance to do the right thing. He will probably say no though, saying something like there is no budget available. Or promise you a raise in the future. Or give you a minimal raise to prevent you from leaving.

The unfortunate truth is that most employers take advantage of loyalty, instead of rewarding it.

And if you worry about souring you relationship with your boss by demanding a raise (or threatening to leave), remember that the relationship is already soured by them not rewarding you properly.

Are we talking about old school for loops with explicit indices, or the newer for..of?

I think for..of looks nicer than forEach with its nested scope. It's also nicer (and less error prone) than manually working with indices in old school for loops.

If Dante Dante Alighieri was still alive, he would probably update his Divine Comedy to have a special place in hell for the people that invented Gradle.

There they will be stuck in a constant loop of fixing Gradle errors, building, getting Gradle errors, fixing, building, etc...