Yeah, I always wonder, if it was an intentional decision or just some first draft that stayed in.

Because I do think, it’s kind of smart. Some macros make sense to call with either () or {}, depending on if you pass a code snippet that’s multi-line or not.
So, you could come up with a complicated syntax to define which bracket types are acceptable, or you could just not bother. 🙃

We don’t really do Halloween here, but I still feel like I’ve skipped straight to “finally”.

I actually would’ve wanted to stock up on groceries earlier today, but then I realized it’s getting dark, so there might be people outside doing Halloween-related activities, so I postponed that to Monday…

I always enjoy this one: https://crates.io/crates/inline-python

Apparently, Python’s syntax is almost entirely a subset of Rust’s syntax + a few keywords, so even though you have to pass valid Rust tokens into a macro, that’s good enough to write Python with just a few quirks.

Oh man, I lightly skimmed the comic before deciding to read and I was convinced the joke would be that the bride doesn’t want her husband-to-be to look at the bridesmaid’s cleavage, so that’s why she should hold the flowers. 🫠

So,

• someone googled “racist joke”,
• decided to include it into a presentation on how not to be racist,
• decided they themselves don’t want to be racist, so the joke should be told between people of different skin color, and
• at no point did they get up and just walk into the woods, never to return to human society again.

That’s certainly not the choices I would’ve made, but sure.

When they first started doing these tests unannounced, our IT department got a horrendous failure rate and then management had to announce that if we recognize it as a phishing simulation, we should still report it, and we also shouldn’t start poking around in the supposed phishing links. 😅

Moreso correctness, not security. In the end, your user is shooting themselves in their foot, if they mutate a variable that they shouldn’t, and by making the variable private and only offering a getter, we document that.

Having said that, there’s also big differences between languages and paradigms, though.
In object-oriented / garbage-collected languages, you often pass around references to an object into so many places that you need to code defensively versus your own codebase. That’s why getters/setters were taught religiously during the height of OOP.

In other paradigms, you often just have one place that uses an object and then you can …simply not shoot yourself in the foot there. When you control both the definition and the access, you don’t need to protect yourself from yourself. In particular, you would probably think twice before mutating an object anyways.

Be mindful that it’s often just a handful accounts that post this stuff.

Well, alright, it’s actually 36 accounts with the username “cm0002”, but you get the idea.