named arguments

Is this supposed to be a critical feature?

Aside from the obvious UX disaster, Git has some big issues:

I find this blend of claims amusing. I've been using Git for years on end, with Git LFS and rebase-heavy user flows, and for some odd reason I never managed to stumble upon these so-called "disasters". Odd.

What I do stumble upon are mild annoyances, such as having to deal with conflicts when reordering commits, or the occasional submodule hiccup because it was misused as a replacement for a package manager when it really shouldn't, but I would not call any of these "disasters". The only gripe I have with Git is the lack of a command to split a past commit into two consecutive commits (a reverse of a squash commit), specially when I accidentally bundled changes to multiple files that shouldn't have been bundled. It's nothing an interactive rebase doesn't solve, but it's multiple steps that could be one.

Can you point out what is the most disastrous disaster you can possibly conceive about Git? Just to have a clear idea where that hyperbole lies.

Remembering ActiveX Controls, the Web’s Biggest Mistake:

Running JavaScript everywhere is looming as one of the biggest screwups in InfoSec. What do userscript extensions like Grease monkey teach us?

So you started with the need to authenticate, which should be documented in the requirements. You know, the things that are required to happen.

I think you're confusing documentation with specification.

Requirements are specified. They are the goals and the conditions in which they are met. Documentation just means paper trails on how things were designed and are expected to work.

Requirements drive the project. Documentation always lag behind the project.

std::unordered_map is one of the worst ones

It should be noted that the benchmark focused on the std::unordered_map implementation from GCC 13.2.0. I'm not sure if/how this conclusion can be extended to other implementations such as msvc or clang.

That is the work of a software engineer.

To build upon this, we need to keep in mind that at least in some jurisdictions the role of a certified engineer is only required in projects with relevant size, and the responsibility of that engineer is to ensure the project complies with all requirements and therefore be held responsible for any mishap. This means that it's perfectly fine if non-engineers work independently on complex tasks, provided that an engineer attests that their output is fine and takes responsibility in case it isn't and it causes problems.

Poorly defined nomenclature. Simple as that. I’m an “automation engineer”, have had many other titles (...)

Anyone can call themselves what they feel like it. However, in some jurisdictions and contexts the title "engineer" does have a specific meaning, consisting of someone who not only has the necessary and sufficient training but also is a member of a specific professional body. These credentials have meaning and those who try to pass themselves off as one without having the certification or credentials might be breaking laws.

(...) so more open standards and just Web apps instead of proprietary apps

What do you classify as "proprietary apps", and from the user's standpoint where do you see a difference between them and web apps?

Leaving my 0.02$ here:

Please don't deploy this bot. It's annoying, it contributes nothing to actually create interesting content for the community to engage, and in fact its main output is spam.

It does more harm than good. Please don't.

I'd add that if the idea was any good then instead of spamming people left and right, it would suffice to crosspost stuff on target communities.

Now you mention it, maybe people with a better interview/offer rate are also doing a better job on not wasting time with positions they aren’t a great fit?

Yes, that's indeed a key factor. However, I should stress that some of these adverts simply do not have a position to fill. Recruiters post these ads, they go through candidates, sometimes they even line up some interviews, but ultimately they do not have a job to fill at all. In my experience this is the norm with staffing agencies.

If you're applying for positions posted by staffing and recruiting agencies, I believe you should set your expectations so that you expect nothing to come out and, even though you should do your best when applying, you should take a fire-and-forget approach to them.

Using linting to prevent coupling between modules can give you some of the benefits of micro services without going all in.

My point was that modularizing an application and decoupling components does not, by any mean, give any of the benefits of microservices.

The benefits of microservices are organizational and operational independence. Where do you see coupling between components to play a role in any of these traits?

Does it have to?

If you're a developer looking for a pastime working on a personal project, no. You're free to waste your time and effort doing anything that pleases you.

Everyone else in the world only bothers with something if it provides any value at all. If a project such as this one fails to provide any value them no one will have any reason to waste their time with it, no matter how many times you rewrite it in Rust.