Not a Thinkpad and not Intel, but that already seems attainable with the asus G14 (AMD 8945HS + NVIDIA 4070) or the upcoming asus zenbook S16 (AMD HX 370).
I've never seen a large company with more L7+ engineers than L7+ managers. Usually it's a ratio of drastically more managers hired/promoted into those levels than engineers, and some orgs don't have any engineers in those levels at all.
I prefer sticking with bash where necessary (where a script is the only thing that will reasonably work), and elsewhere using a programming language with testing, type checking, modularity, and compilation into something with zero or minimal runtime dependencies.
I get you, but it's both a TypeScript and JavaScript feature, and more importantly TypeScript is including it in its next official release whereas it is still not part of ECMAScript (though close, at stage 3).
So speaking specifically of a new TypeScript feature is justified here.
That has the same answer. I'm not sure what you're looking for.
The polyfill adds code at the start of the block to make an array, and code at the end of the block to call dispose on everything in the array. Then the transpiler just has to turn "using" into an append.
There's some other details to handle exceptions but that's the basics of how it works.
Edited: The code, polyfill or native, doesn't really know if things can be disposed. It just tries to do it, because you told it to. If the variable is null it skips it, otherwise it asserts that the dispose function exists at using time, and blindly runs it at the end of block.
What happens if you save a reference to (or return, etc.) the variable you declared with "using"? Then it will end up automatically disposed, but from the programmers point of view it should still be usable (not disposed).
> from the programmers point of view it should still be usable (not disposed)
Then that programmer had their hopes too high. The basic "using" keyword is not for variables you want to move between scopes. Javascript doesn't do reference counting.
For saving/returning, you need to use explicit instances of DisposableStack and .move()
Is this similar to people moving away from giving their code as open source when companies take it, repackage, and sell it while the authors get nothing?
A lot of open source licenses demand that if the licensed code is included in a derivative work, that new work has to carry the same license. GitHub Copilot is straightforwardly violating these terms in many cases, and I hope the pending class action lawsuit sets statutory boundaries around the inclusion of data in a training set, and that those boundaries are retroactive.
It's a different criteria, not necessary a plus. It's domain knowledge based hiring, knowing Zig can be worse than not knowing Zig but with experience of writing low level stuff (especially things from scratch requires protocols implementation experience)
