Why am I suddenly staring at the sun?

Honestly, this is why I tell developers that work with/for me to build in logging, day one. Not only will you always have clarity in every environment, but you won’t run into cases where adding logging later makes races/deadlocks “go away mysteriously.” A lot of the time, attaching a debugger to stuff in production isn’t going to fly, so “printf debugging” like this is truly your best bet.

To do this right, look into logging modules/libraries that support filtering, lazy evaluation, contexts, and JSON output for perfect SEIM compatibility (enterprise stuff like Splunk or ELK).

Heisenbugs are the worst. My condolences for being tasked with diagnosing one.

Last time I did anything on the job with C++ was about 8 years ago. Here’s what I learned. It may still be relevant.

• C++14 was alright, but still wasn’t everything you need. The language has improved a lot since, so take this with a grain of salt. We had to use Boost to really make the most of things and avoid stupid memory management problems through use of smart (ref-counted) pointers. The overhead was worth it.
• C++ relies heavily on idioms for good code quality that can only be learned from a book and/or the community. “RAII” is a good example here. The language itself is simply too flexible and low-level to force that kind of behavior on you. To make matters worse, idiomatic practices wind up adding substantial weight to manual code review, since there’s no other way to enforce them or check for their absence.
• I wound up writing a post-processor to make sense of template errors since it had a habit of completely exploding any template use to the fullest possible expression expansion; it was like typedefs didn’t exist. My tool replaced common patterns with expressions that more closely resembled our sourcecode¹. This helped a lot with understanding what was actually going wrong. At the same time, it was ridiculous that was even necessary.
• A team style guide is a hard must with C++. The language spec is so mindbogglingly huge that no two “C++ programmers” possess the same experience with the language. Yes, their skillsets will overlap, but the non-overlapping areas can be quite large and have profound ramifications on coding preferences. This is why my team got into serious disagreements with style and approach without one: there was no tie-breaker to end disagreement. We eventually adopted one after a lot of lost effort and hurt feelings.
• Coding C++ is less like having a conversation with the target CPU and more like a conversation with the compiler. Templates, const, constexpr, inline, volatile, are all about steering the compiler to generate the code you want. As a consequence, you spend a lot more of your time troubleshooting code generation and compilation errors than with other languages.
• At some point you will need valgrind or at least a really good IDE that’s dialed in for your process and target platform. Letting the rest of the team get away without these tools will negatively impact the team’s ability to fix serious problems.
• C++ assumes that CPU performance and memory management are your biggest problems. You absolutely have to be aware of stack allocation, heap allocation, copies, copy-free, references, pointers, and v-tables, which are needed to navigate the nuances of code generation and how it impacts run-time and memory.
• Multithreading in C++14 was made approachable through Boost and some primitives built on top of pthreads. Deadlocks and races were a programmer problem; the language has nothing to help you here. My recommendation: take a page from Go’s book. Use a really good threadsafe mutable queue, copy (no references/pointers) everything into it, and use it for moving mutable state between threads until performance benchmarks tell you to do otherwise.
• Test-driven design and DevOps best-practice is needed to make any C++ project of scale manageable. I cannot stress this enough. Use every automated quality gate you can to catch errors before live/integration testing, as using valgrind and other in-situ tools can be painful (if not impossible).

1 - I borrowed this idea from working on J2EE apps, of all places, where stack traces get so huge/deep that there are plugins designed to filter out method calls (sometimes, entire libraries) that are just noise. The idea of post-processing errors just kind of stuck after that - it’s just more data, after all.

I actually tried to use marketplace a few weeks ago. It was an unmitigated disaster. People either didn’t respond, had stale posts for items, or couldn’t get their act together to have a conversation (even with 12 hours between messages) about how to get shit out of their house. I have never yearned for old-fashioned yard sales so much.

I agree, but I feel like having the toaster itself catch fire could have been mitigated somehow.

I’m actually kind of amazed that the failure mode for “toaster used sideways” is that it just catches fire. That’s one hell of a design flaw.

This is basically how Ixion went. The game didn’t need a soundtrack to go this hard, but it absolutely put it over the top.

Oh. That’s good.

Plus I can’t recall if I’ve ever seen one of these parties entertain competition against an incumbent (or former president). In such cases, the party nomination is kinda/sorta a formality. This is why we have heard of zero alternative candidates from either the RNC or DNC.

You may be right. A few other comment here have remarked at his neckerchief being not quite right. That also doesn’t exclude the possibility for a digital touch-up, or a photoshoot as a dedicated training model for AI.

Not to come off as a musk fan-boy (I am most certainly not), but that’s a damn good photograph. Absolutely a professional photoshoot with hilariously high-end wardrobe.

Time to refer to the checklist:

[x] Hat
[ ] Cattle

Sorry to hear about your friend. While I’m no doctor, that seems to fit the bill to me. I’ve known people that had other trauma when young, and yeah, maintaining healthy relationships seems to be the hardest thing for them. Your story reminded me of a lot.

Yes, but it’s a little worse than that. One might take that to mean environmental, congenital, or even genetic factors. But there’s more. Consider the role that trauma has to play here as it can directly cause arrested psychological development:

https://psychcentral.com/ptsd/signs-trauma-has-you-stuck

Possibly? Or maybe people will think twice about deadnaming you.

I mean, maybe if you bake a stone cold potato that was in the fridge and then cook it for two hours? But even then we’re probably talking about a handful of minutes at the most.

Which car company bar did you say you work for?

A major one.

Never understood the appeal honestly.

Same here. I spent about 30 minutes trying to play one (DoTA I think?) and figured out:

• Each hero has a zillion upgrades and abilities
• Each hero is basically on their own roguelite style upgrade path
• The game has a dozen or more such heroes
• icons and text too small to play on livingroom TV, controller play out of the question
• at mercy of online match-making algorithm if I’m not in a league/clan/whatever

From this I could deduce:

• There’s no way in hell this is perfectly balanced - too many variables, it may as well be MttG
• Going to take 20 or more hours to dial in a personal play style
• Going to take probably 50-100 to develop a play style that can adapt to most situations
• League play will probably kick my ass, requiring another 50-100 hours of practice/training
• Causal play is out; likely can’t pick up and play immediately due to lobby, variable match times

I’m not knocking the genre as a whole, but this is not for me. It’s too far outside my typical mode of gaming and is likely to just frustrate me more than anything else. I’m familiar with hard to play online games like Quake, TF2, and even Soldat. But those have small power systems that, even with gross imbalances, were still playable because there were usually only one or two scenarios you couldn’t overcome. Adding more on every axis just sounds like a wildly unbalanced system where the skill curve isn’t steep enough, costing a lot of time invested in bad strategies before you figure it all out.