Wormhole X-treme is the best. They criticize and second guess every plot-issue on the series.

My favorite is on the last season:

• I’m writing the story for this episode, and the characters are stuck on $complex_situation$. I don’t know how to get them out, do you have any idea?

• Why don’t they $stuff_stagate_did_2_episodes_ago$?

• What? No! That’s stupid! - and goes on for a minute or so enumerating all the problems with the plot.

You are thinking about a soldering plate? Those go up to 300°C or some times 400°C.

A phone screen is fixed with hot glue, that starts to melt around 60°C.

That’s a very good point.

It applies to more things than software projects. Like new companies keep innovating until they succeed. Political organizations keep pressing for change until they get some small gain. People are eager to throw themselves at work until they get something they care about…

Hum… That implies that at least 30% of some subclass of projects are successful.

“People complain about C’s security issues because it’s too easy to learn” was absolutely not on my bingo card either.

The same for “Javascript frameworks exclude the less experienced”.

Joins and tables are abstract concepts, they don’t dictate how you store data on memory or disk or how you read it.

If you want a specialized data storage, go with whatever format is easier for you to use. But also, the format that is easier to store is not necessarily the easiest one to work on memory.

Less filament, yes. But it’s almost always weaker.

It’s common to add holes so you get a stronger part.

Hum, ok, I misunderstood you.

Your 1 triangle will need the inclination similar to that middle segment of the bottom side of the piece. I will be huge.

I imagine the “optimized” there means it has the maximum weight support with the minimum amount of filament.

This shape certainly beats a triangle with only the walls or with just a bit of infill. And it surely takes less filament than one with near to 100% of infill.

Yet the world is full of code that was replaced with less work than it would take to fix a single bug on the broken original.

It’s almost like if universal rules for software engineering doesn’t exist… but no, that’s crazy.

C++ is leagues above C in this regard.

It’s really not. It has the same flaws, some libraries that promise to avoid them (as long as you don’t hold them wrong - what every single programmer does), and lots and lots of new flaws that may come from anywhere.

the bed tramming is normal, even GREAT printers need it done every few weeks or so

I brought my current printer assembled in 2020 (thus, with the bed adjusted). And I have done it once since then.

But I do run auto bed-leveling for every print.

“Composition” is one of those historically loaded names.

Oh, ok. You want to learn PIC assembly.

Forth is a fun language, in that most of what one would study on compilers do no apply to it at all. You would need some book specifically aimed at Forth.

I don’t think you will get anything useful from computer science material. You need focused, technical material, not theory.

Anyway, a processor manual is usually called a “datasheet”. (E.g. https://ww1.microchip.com/downloads/en/devicedoc/35007b.pdf) That will have the hardware information (instructions, interruptions, I/O, embedded devices, hardware flags, register types, etc).

The types, variables, and control flow are defined by the language, not the hardware. And again, whatever Forth gives you will be highly unusual and probably not covered on a compilers book. I don’t have a good book on Forth to recommend.

(I hope somebody gets a better recommendation than mine, because honestly, now that I understood your problem, this is quite useless. Sorry.)

“Deeper understanding of how these compilers are written” you can get in a compiler book. I’ve found a copy of the dragon book here: https://iitd-plos.github.io/col729/refs/ALSUdragonbook.pdf

Currently, I’d recommend you read a monadic parser tutorial and jump over the practical material about compiler parsing (the theory is still very useful). There re more modern books, more focused on semantics, but I don’t remember of any to recommend you.

“Deeper understanding about compilers across different architectures” looks like an assembly course to me. If you want to compare RISC and CISC, you’ll probably want x86 assembly and something like MIPS. (Notice that you will probably never use any of those on practice. But any assembly you would use on practice is too complicated to start with.)

But that “yet share common compiled structures” part, I have no idea at all. I’m not sure anybody formally studies this. You may want to read about the LLVM intermediate representation and how to create a backend for it.

I guess all the good names were taken.

Categories are just the same as half of math, with less historical cargo so that they can all forced to look the same. But well, that historical stuff already took all the names.

I don’t understand…

Are you trying to learn how to make compilers/interpreters? Are you trying to learn how to write assembly like the compiler does? Or are you trying to have a deeper understanding of those languages?

Those are all very different things. (Computer architecture is also one very different thing, but from what I understand that’s not what you want.)

inconsistent extrusion due to variation in hot end temp and/or filament width

Also, a moist filament.

Hum… By the end of DS9 he lives in the federation. For nearly all of it he lives in Bajor, and shortly before it he lives in the Cardassian Empire.

Yeah, I could see the Lower Decks version of him speaking it.

That static moon…

Is it secretly a balloon?