feddup

Didn't even have to click it to know which one that was! Perfect example

This is my biggest issue I've found rewatching daredevil, he's so against killing people yet the number of people he's knocked out would mean he's killed many or given a lot of people brain damage.

A boolean value only needs 1 bit (on or off) for true or false. However the smallest bit of addressable memory is a byte (8 bits) hence 7 are technically wasted.

For low memory devices you could instead store 8 different Boolean values in one single byte by using bit masking instead

I think in many cases it results in separate discussion over slack, probably between managers but it still often ends up in a follow up meeting.

Nope, all in a teams meeting discussing something, topic diverges or becomes too complicated and is slowing the meeting. Manager says "let's take this offline" or "we'll discuss offline". Keeps the meeting focused but I hate the phrase. It's not offline because it'll just be another teams meeting!

I guess it depends on the company, so far mine it's just making more meetings but keeping the current one focused. I'm fine with that, just hate the expression because it only makes sense if the follow up meeting was in person but we're all remote

I really wish they'd use drill down instead

Especially if the MVP ends up with a lot of scope creep for features that are not MVP

Let's take that offline perhaps better as let's discuss that separately/later.

Double clicking should just be something like "to go into more detail" or something. I get why it happens, easy and quick to say, i just find it so irritating.

Leadership at the company I work for started saying "let's double click that" to mean let's go into more detail on that topic. Hate it.

Also "let's take this offline" which just means let's have a different meeting about it, it'll still be online because we're all remote.

I see your point and do agree greenfield projects can be great for learning new languages but only if the project is simple enough. Browsers are huge and complex, language choice is very important as well as who will be working on it.

I think one of the arguments as well was that building the DOM in rust would have extra challenges as it's fundamentally very object oriented so having a language suited to OOP would make it easier.

I think there was an interview where that question was asked and after various languages being evaluated it came down to being the language everyone working on it was most familiar with.

I'm looking forward to using it in the future.