The back cover of C++: The Language raises questions not answered by front cover
68 points
3 hours ago
| 6 comments
| devblogs.microsoft.com
| HN
seanhunter
1 hour ago
[-]
It reminds me of an incident involving an old colleague of mine at some kind of graduate recruitment fair thing. He walked past a stand which was trying to hire engineers which had some code on the wall when the following exchange happened:

   Recruiter: Hey there! <indicates the code> Do you know what this is?
   Colleague: Err, <looks…thinks for a bit>… It *looks* like some sort of network protocol
   Recruiter: <smug> No, it’s *COMPUTER CODE*
reply
bad_username
53 minutes ago
[-]
I wish <smug></smug> was a real HTML tag
reply
kstrauser
43 minutes ago
[-]
It's a semantic div tag, and it's spelled "<actually>".
reply
20k
1 hour ago
[-]
Its crazy to me how little effort publishers put into the basic parts of their job sometimes. Its even funnier that raymond chen of all people is the one calling this out
reply
defrost
1 hour ago
[-]
On the matter of book back text, The Profit by Kehlog Albran has a rear blurb that likens the style of the author to that of a man with a much larger brain.
reply
Bolwin
1 hour ago
[-]
Also is this an official Microsoft dev blog?

Probably not a good look back at publishing hq

reply
taneq
2 minutes ago
[-]
This post discusses the topic and makes several key observations.
reply
koolala
58 minutes ago
[-]
At least the JavaScript image is excusable since most implementations are made in C++.
reply
pjmlp
5 minutes ago
[-]
And some of us expect that candidates have at least read the C++ addons documentation chapter.
reply
block_dagger
1 hour ago
[-]
A clear case of human slop.
reply
gruntled-worker
1 hour ago
[-]
auto get_xyz_position() -> std::unordered_map<std::string, double *> { ... }
reply
hmry
1 hour ago
[-]
You'll need to elaborate
reply