Chris's Random Ramblings
I've been enjoying reading quite a few papers on operating systems lately, mostly related to the research in memory management I've been working on for K42. One of the more interesting ones I've read is titled Debugging Operating Systems with Time-Traveling Virtual Machines. It describes changes to the linux kernel and gdb which allow a programmer using the debugger to step backwards to an arbitary point in execution. Its primarily to be used for debugging of the operating system, but is also apparently applicable to user-space programs as well.
I haven't been keeping up with web design techniques for the last few years, so I spent Sunday night learning CSS. Hopefully my web pages look a little less last-century now.
talloc allows you to create hierarchies of memory allocation, and then when freeing a parent, having all the child nodes also freed automatically. It also allows you to attach arbitrary destructors to nodes which are run when the memory is freed. One example of using a destructor is to close file descriptors. These features allow you to remove a lot of complicated or cluttering error paths from your program without leaking resources. It brings to C some features of C++. Appealing to those who have a strong dislike of programming in C++. Next on the list may even be exception handling.
A company that made programmers wear suits would have something deeply wrong with it.And what would be wrong would be that how one presented oneself counted more than the quality of one's ideas. That's the problem with formality. Dressing up is not so much bad in itself. The problem is the receptor it binds to: dressing up is inevitably a substitute for good ideas. It is no coincidence that technically inept business types are known as "suits."
Over the years, I've asked a few people outside the computing industry what they think about having to dress up to go to work. One reason which comes up often is that they don't believe other people will take them as seriously if they don't wear formal clothing. Although I think this is unfortunate, I can understand the feeling. It is disappointing to experience significant differences in levels of customer support in retail shops depending on whether you're dressed casually (but neatly), or in a suit. Even when shopping in places you would at first think it would be irrelevant. Interestingly this doesn't seem to happen nearly so much in the US (west coast at least) as compared to Australia. Perhaps it is because there are many more wealthy people who dress casually, and the shops can not afford to be so snobby.
I don't think the situation in the general workplace will change until more people decide that what you wear is not relevant and decide to dress how they want to (casual or formal), rather than in what they believe will impress other people. It'll probably cause problems for those who attempt to start the trend, but in the end I think it would lead to a better situation. One where we value people on their ideas and what they produce, rather than what they are wearing. I'm lucky enough to work in an industry where this convention has already been established.