MeanEYE

VLC, it’s in the name.

Neatly put resume with some obvious things to improve. Order of elements should be different, for example working experience and references usually come last because when we are looking to hire we are quick glancing over skills first then look where you worked. Those being on top of the page matter.

So I’d list things this way: Education, Technical Skills & Certifications, Projects, Experience, References (if you have any).

Another thing I’d like to point out is if you have GitHub/GitLab account do link that. Your code speaks a lot louder than CV and might get you past first round of elimination. Managers do look at that and it matters a lot. Am not in the job market for past 10 years or so but I still get job offers regularly just because I have publicly available code and few open source projects of some popularity.

You are already doing a great job at keeping things short but I’ll say it anyway: Don’t inflate skills and knowledge to make the resume look richer. Write what you are confident in using and what you’d like to use eventually. Any developer can say ah I can write 15 different languages, because once you learn syntax and few intricacies all of them more or less are the same. But if you don’t know standard library and have experience working with it you might paint yourself in the corner where you’d get a job and have to work on language you are not comfortable with or even worse get tested using it and then fail on a stupid thing. Most managers know if you are proficient in one language, learning another is matter of time. That and you want to put the best foot forward.

Good luck. Your sneaking suspicion is wrong. If only all the resumes I had to review were this concise.

They are small but no need for a tilt shift. Eggs are half size, and so are they. We had a bunch of them for years as decoration. Great pest control.

Around double.

And everyone is conveniently forgetting that both sides killed people.

While true, Git also supports symlinks, so nothing is stopping you from having modules/ directory or something similar and then in link part of it elsewhere in your project.

Hardware is complex and mysterious enough without added complexity of an esoteric language.

Do people still think, after all this time and so many different languages, that there will be one language to rule them all? I mean technically you can drive nails with a rock, but you don’t see a carpenter using one. Right tool for the job. Always was, always will be.

Can be compressed very efficiently. I do dread the thought of writing a driver in brainfuck.

More to the point it refers to relation between elements and not the political correctness of the act. Just how the terminology is used in books, but reading one doesn’t imply you are a racist or condone slavery.

For a while, yes, you had to. Every new repo would be main while old ones remained master. Tools that default to a specific branch aside now you had to remember and check which branch you are merging into every time.

That’s like forcing people to have different color shoe laces and calling it good practice. In reality it changed nothing but forced a lot of people to work on solving issues with their scripts and automation tools for the sake of change instead of spending that time on writing actual code and fixing bugs.

This, sooo much this! People don’t realize that this change created a lot of unnecessary work to a lot of developers for no other reason than PR or to act smug about it. They solved slavery problem by renaming master to main equally well as they solved homophobia and transphobia by allowing people to specify pronouns on their profiles. Who the hell cares if you identify as tree sap. However many do care if your code sucks or doesn’t follow coding style.

I can’t wait for asshats to start calling for gender fluid connectors. What’s that, male 3.5mm connector, did you just assume my connectors identity?

How can you? I would understand if you have to, but Mercurial/Git approach is so much more flexible.

This is a huge pain in the ass for us as well. We have some automation with development environment and deployment of certain scripts. We had to redo a good chunk of them to first test whether there’s main or master. And it took us a long time to find stragglers that weren’t as frequently updated but would suddenly break deploymend after minor changes.

Had to refresh my memory, it’s been a while. They didn’t change branch on existing projects, but they did change it on new repos to main by default. Our tools indeed created repositories and configured everything for the developer automatically. However GitHub’s policy meant that you had to either change the tools to detect whether they are working with old repo or new, or go to every new project after automatic configuration fails, configure default branch and then rerun the tool. Same thing then happened to few of our tools that were used for CI.

All in all they made more work for us for no reason other than be smug about it and it changed exactly nothing.

They forced the change. If I wanted otherwise, I had to go and specify per project that master was the default branch, and there were many of those. And whole “insanely fragile” is just nonsense or are you trying to tell me people have conditions and scripts that detects what’s the default branch and use that instead of assuming default name that hasn’t changed for 15 years would remain default?

Whether you like Linus or not, whatever is released to users stops being a bug and becomes a feature. Not breaking user-space is a must. Instead they achieved nothing and caused a lot of unnecessary work to a lot of developers.

Oh, how upset I was by that decision. I still call out GitHub online every now and then thanking them for solving slavery by messing up my deployment scripts and development environments.

Just use brainfuck for everything. The entry barrier for the programming industry needs to be higher anyway.