I completely agree with everything you said. I wish we could see exactly what that person said.

I feel like a bit of context is appropriate ‡:

During the October 21 trial, she defended her posts as emotionally driven responses to the genocide in Gaza, stating she aimed to critique Zionism, not Judaism. Despite acknowledging that some of her words were “very violent,” she insisted her intentions were misinterpreted.

The vast majority of people in France criticizing Israel don’t get arrested. The French have even elected a French-Palestinian for the European Parliament (Rima Hassan), who’s been caught red-handed spreading fake news about Israel training dogs to rape palestinians, and is not in prison †

She won’t go to prison for this (suspended sentence, plus ankle bracelet).

I can’t tell if she actually advocated for terrorism, because I can’t find her exact words. But I wouldn’t be so quick to defend her given the circumstances. It could be true that she broke the law.

‡ https://qudsnen.co/?p=50621&amp

† https://www.lepoint.fr/politique/les-fake-news-de-rima-hassan-sur-la-guerre-a-gaza-27-06-2024-2564158_20.php

There are more and more confrontations with that police being reported than there were before the massive protests. Just yesterday, a woman was caught stripping in front of the morality police as a sign of protest.

Again, we don’t live in a Holywood reality. Grow up. What these people are doing is pretty brave, and Iranians don’t need dooming killjoys.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/women-iran-going-hijabs-2nd-anniversary-mahsa-aminis-death-approaches-rcna171123

Not my experience. I’ve had the displeasure of having to use Rider at work, and it’s much slower than VSCode, if only for boot times which are a pain in the butt for large projects. You gotta pay for that bloat and feature creep somehow.

And that’s on a Xeon machine.

As for refactoring, yes, Rider has lots of options that don’t work and do half the job. So much so, that I don’t use them at all, because they’re unreliable.

The requirement for Copilot to qualify an IDE is a bit funny. First, VSCode has some support for it, and, secondly, this is super recent, so unless IDEs didn’t exist since last year, I’d say this is not core to the definition of IDE.

I’d go easy with the recommendation to couple components loosely. If you make things that belong together loosely coupled, you’ve created obfuscation, and added complexity to your codebase. Loose coupling makes sense, but not everywhere.

I just shat bricks realizing this.

If higher-ups complain about intempestive code refactoring, it’s always a good idea to stop for a moment and to start becoming less trigger-happy with refactors. It’s OK to take some time to determine what actual value refactors bring to the project in tangible terms - intuition is not enough. Convincing a critical manager is a good start, because their tolerance for programmer bullshit is low if they don’t actually write code.

Very often, and this is especially prevalent among junior programmers who care about what they do, the reasoning for refactoring turns out to be something along the lines of “I don’t like this” or “I read some cool blog article saying things should be done that way”, without any care about whether or not the change in question is actually improving anything, or, if it does, if the improvement is worth the degradation in terms of quality (new bugs)/maintainability (added genericity making the code more difficult to understand, cryptic features of the language being used that make it hard to understand what’s going on, I’m sure there’s other examples…)

The problem is you often get in cases where the developer cannot back their intuition that something is actually harmful with facts. When it’s not just pure bikeshedding about code they don’t like and falsely claim to be a ticking timebomb, they fail to weigh the risks of leaving slightly offputting code in the codebase against the risks associated with significant code changes in general, which, even with tests, will still inevitably break.

Developers of all sorts tend to vastly overestimate how dangerous a piece of code may be.

To be clear, while I’ve seen it with other developers, I’m still guilty of this myself to this day. I’m not saying I’m any better than anybody.

It’s just that I’ve seen how disruptive refactoring can be, and, while it is often necessary, I thought it would be important to mention that I think it should be done with care.

If you can convince a manager with rational arguments in terms of product quality, it can be a good way to make the case for a refactor, because your manager probably won’t be impressed by arguments about unimportant nuances we developers obsess about.

Have you read the article? It’s a shared experience multiple people report, and the article even provides statistics.