thank you for sharing that article

it's a long read but a good one, well written and well thought out

agree to disagree

I can concede that in games programming (which I'm not a game dev so I often forget about) x, y, and z coordinates are a valid exception.

I would disagree about w and h for width and height, typing them out feels like i for index

I worry about the phrase, "you'll immediately know what the variable is for at a glance even though it's a single character"

how often have you heard developers say that something is simple and it's just because they wrote it? maybe it is obvious, but if it were more verbose it would be just as obvious but without any possibility of misunderstanding

and even if it's obvious now there's no guarantee a future developer doesn't pull that variable out and mutate it or do something else with it, and maybe they should change it at that point but the effort to have it verbosely named from the start is miniscule

No single letter variable names. Yes I also mean the i in for loops you see in tutorials. Write out "index" or give it a more descriptive name. Doing the typing isn't the hard part of programming, nor the most time consuming, so making it take a teeny tiny bit longer by having longer variable names is more than worth the value of variables the effortlessly describe themselves.

line length is not that big of a problem anymore, we're not on CRTs, people are regularly developing with 4k monitors, we don't need to limit to 40 character lines but even still if you can't possibly think of a way to break up that long of a line and the only thing you can think of to make it shorter is using over-acronymized variable names then you've already lost the plot somewhere

Since it's apparent you can spot what tutorials do it wrong, would you be able to provide links or references to online tutorials that get it right?

One of the most valuable things you can do if you know a technology well enough to have these gripes is not just to condemn people fucking it up but shine a light on people that are trying to do it well.

I understood some of those words

laid off a few months ago and I've been searching for another senior software engineer role in the US for far too long and have gotten to the point where I'm unironically considering applying to places with a resume that is just a few bold sentences about my aptitude as an engineer.

Not because I think it'll work, but because you just start grasping at straws when a decade of development isn't enough to get past ATS and your resume looks like everyone else's.

What have I got to lose? I only even get denials 40% of the time anyways, the other 60% they don't bother responding at all.

wild that there's no sign warning of corn rash

or some u.s.-centric ones that break with .co.uk

the fans aren't insufferable as a rule, but any fanbase large enough will have a loud minority that is insufferable, and sanderson has a large fanbase

I bet had Tolkien write TLotR in 2000, well into the information age, we would see exactly the same thing

excellent world building, but plots that are fine

people really like good world building. like, really really like it.

if you read them you'll see that they do blend well

it sounds like you won't, but I have read everything published and the numerous magic systems all feel very unique, but are based on a very sound central logic

one of his foundational tenets in writing magic systems is something like exploring the limits of a magic system before you expand it, and he absolutely does that

mistborn's second trilogy is a perfect example of that, there's not new magic, or at least not much of it, but a remixing of what was in the first trilogy and all of the implications of that remixing was more than enough for the second trilogy

the fans may be insufferable but neither the author nor the work itself holds itself in as high a regard

personally I'm excited to see movie and tv adaptations of the cosmere. there's a lot of potential.