Try-Catch Block Party

That fleeting moment of joy when you find the perfect function in the docs, only to have your soul crushed in four stages of documentation grief. First comes hope, then the deprecation warning (which you ignore because it still works, right?), then the gut punch that it's completely gone, and finally the existential crisis when you realize the new API designers decided your use case wasn't worth supporting anymore. Nothing says "welcome to programming" like building your entire solution around a function that's secretly on death row.

Content Python: What if everything was a dict? Java: What if everything was an object? JavaScript: What if everything was a dict and an object? C: What if everything was a pointer? APL: What if everything was an array? Tel: What if everything was a string? Prolog: What if everything was a term? LISP: What if everything was a pair? Scheme: What if everything was a function? Haskell: What if everything was a monad? Assembly: What if everything was a register? Cog: What if everything was a typeproposition? COBOL: WHAT IF EVERYTHING WAS UPPERCASE? C: What if everything was like Java, but different? Ruby: What if everything was monkey patched? Pascal: BEGIN What if everything was structured? END C: What if we added everything to the language? C11: What if we forgot to stop adding stuff? Rust: What if garbage collection didn't exist? Go: What if we tried designing C a second time? Perl: What if shell, sed, and awk were one language? Peri6: What if we took the joke too far? PHP: What if we wanted to make SQL injection easier? VB: What if we wanted to allow anyone to program? VB.NET: What if we wanted to stop them again? Forth: What if everything was a stack? ColorForth: What if the stack was green? PostScript: What if everything was printed at 600dpi? XSLT: What if everything was an XML element? Make: What if everything was a dependency? m4: What if everything was incomprehensibly quoted? Scala: What if Haskell ran on the JVM? Clojure: What if LISP ran on the JVM? Lua: What if game developers got tired of C? Mathematica: What if Stephen Wolfram invented everything? Malbolge: What if there is no god? nixcraft

Content Interviewer: gives a hard algorithmic problem Me: solves it using library functions Interviewer: Well yes, outstan but it's illegal.

The package manager betrayal saga! When you use npm to install pnpm, you're essentially using the old tool to birth its replacement. The cat's face of pure existential dread says it all—watching as you cuddle with the shiny new package manager while npm realizes it's being phased out of your development stack. It's like hiring someone on LinkedIn to update your LinkedIn profile to "seeking new opportunities." The circle of JavaScript life is brutal.

Content Stephen Gower As someone who has been developing websites since NCSA Mosaic was the only browser available, I'd just like to say that I'm really fcking tired of all the smart assholes out there continuously developing entirely new ways to build web applications. It started simple enough, just html and javascript. Then Cold Fusion. Then java applets. Then java servlets. Then 5 or 6 different Java application servers, EJBs, JSP, struts, XSLT, PHP. But screw all of that. We need Spring. No wait, we need Ruby.and Rails. Wait, we need Query. screw Query. We need AngularJs, and Backbone, and Ember! The world just won't be right until we have 12 different ways to do the same thing in Javascript! Forget all those server-side things you learned. Node js is here! No-wait. F'ck Node. Use Google Go! Honestly how many times are we going to re-invent this wheel? Unless you stay current with all of this nonsense, you basically become unhireable. I'm sure some of you 20 and 30-somethings have already experienced some of this fatigue. Now just imaging 10-15 more years where every 3 years a good portion of what you learned before is now obsolete, and you'll feel like I do.

Three Spider-Men arguing about incrementing a variable, while the fourth one is quietly subtracting? That's peak mathematical chaos. The first Spider-Man proudly shows off x++ (post-increment), the second insists x = x+1 (explicit addition), and the third offers x += 1 (compound assignment). Meanwhile, the fourth Spider-Man, clearly the intellectual villain, drops x -= -1 and watches the universe implode. The true genius is realizing they're all exactly the same operation with different syntax. It's like watching four people fight over whether to say "tomato" or "tomahto" while someone in the corner whispers "nightshade berry" and walks away.