With A Break Statement, Right?

Content It's a time zone change on December 31st in shanghal. See this pace for details of 1927 11860 in Shanghai. Basically at midnight at the end of 1927, the clocks went back 5 minutes and 52 seconds. So "1927-12-31 23:54:08" actually happened twice, and it looks like Java is parsing it as the later possible instant for that local datetime - hence the Just another episode in the often weird and wonderful world of time zones. rebuilt with version 20132 01 1.98. The original question would no ionger demonstrate quite the same behaviour. In 2013a, the result would be 358 seconds, with a transition time of 23-54-03 instead of 23:54:08 I only noticed this because I'm collecting questions like this in Noda Time, in the form of unit tests... The test has now been changed, but it just goes to show - not even historical data is safe In TZDB 2014f, the time of the change has moved to 1900-12-31, and it's now a mere 343 second change (so the time between t and t1 IS 344 seconds, it vou see what I mean). To answer a question around a transition at 1900... it looks like the Java time zone implementation treats all time zones as simply being in their standard time for any instant before the start of 1900 UTC: public class Test public static void main(String args) throws Exception Long for (String id : TimeZone getAvailableIDs) Time?one Zone TimeZone.getTimeZone (id); zone. getraworset zone.gecurtsetstart Sustem.out.println(id); The code above produces no output on my Windows machine. So any time zone which has any offset other than its standard one at the start of 1900 will count that as a transition. 1ZDB itself has some data going back earlier than that, and doesn't rely on any idea of a "fixed standard time (which is what getawOffset assumes to be a valid concept) so other libraries need t introduce this artiticial transition edited Mar 27. 2023 at 19:45 9 54 72 newered lul 27. 2011 at 8:31 Jon Skeet 1.4m 873 49186 4 Our is it still accurate? Son Sees

The evolution of a developer's copy-paste technique is like watching someone level up in a video game. First, you're a noob using the mouse like some kind of digital caveman. Then you graduate to the basic keyboard shortcuts. But the true enlightenment? Spamming Ctrl+C multiple times because you've been burned too many times by clipboard failures. Nothing says "I've been traumatized by lost code" quite like hitting Ctrl+C five times in rapid succession. It's not paranoia if the clipboard really is out to get you.

Content When you help someone fix their code but you can't fix your own I guide others to a treasure that I cannot possess

When the CEO of Coinbase proudly announced that non-technical teams are shipping production code thanks to AI, the entire engineering department collectively felt their blood pressure spike. Sure, let's just hand the keys to production to people who think "merge conflict" is a corporate HR issue. Tech debt is already doing backflips of joy knowing it's about to get three new best friends. Security vulnerabilities are literally high-fiving each other in anticipation. And somewhere, a senior engineer just added "AI-generated code reviewer" to their resume out of pure survival instinct. Nothing says "sustainable software development" quite like letting AI write production code for people who can't tell the difference between a stack trace and a pancake recipe. But hey, at least when the inevitable security breach happens, they can blame the AI. Modern problems require modern scapegoats.

You know that feeling when you change a single semicolon in a legacy codebase and suddenly the entire architecture decides to have a nervous breakdown? Yeah, that's what we're looking at here. The Simpsons house defying all laws of physics and structural integrity is basically every production system after you "just fix that one typo." Everything still technically works, but gravity stopped making sense and Homer's floating through the living room. The code passes all tests, deploys successfully, and then you check the logs. Should you rollback? Probably. Will you? Not before spending 4 hours trying to figure out what cosmic butterfly effect you just triggered.

OH. MY. GOD. The absolute CARNAGE of code reviews! 💀 Four people MERCILESSLY beating the life out of the fifth with their "suggestions" and "best practices." Meanwhile, that poor developer is just CRAWLING on the ground, begging for mercy after submitting what they thought was perfectly acceptable code! The psychological TRAUMA of seeing your precious if-else statements get absolutely DEMOLISHED by Karen from backend who just HAS to point out that you could've used a switch statement instead. THE HORROR!