To me, it seems to be the same as the Norvig algorithm, except that only deletes are considered. Which allows them to pre-calculate misspellings with modest storage cost.
My house cost $76,000 when I purchased it 7 years ago, and it would be only slightly more today - around $85,000 or so. Also, it of course depends on interest rate, loan term, insurance, local taxes, etc. To be fair though, it's a small starter home that my wife and I bought when we first got married. A house we might buy if we were moving now might be more in the $150k-185k range for a nice 4bd. 2.5ba. newer house on a good amount of land (up to 1 acre).
I suggest you buy that next house now. That $185K could become $300K in a hurry. House prices in my area are up by about 50% in 2 years and accelerating. This is partly due to hedge funds buying up houses to rent them out. They'll likely be a big player in every major city eventually.
Been in a few orgs. I now think "no rewrites" is a good policy for all but a few orgs. Few orgs have the (1) business luxury (time and money) or, (2) the caliber of people and, (3) team motivation (few teams people even want to improve things) to pull off rewrites.
The best orgs do a rewrite usually in the face of sea changes to the technology stack (e.g., containers vs. VMs) or business use (number of users is now 10X of original etc). Bringing key infrastructure in-house is also a decent reason, but the benefit of building expertise in an existing ecosystem vs. full rewrite should be carefully weighed.
This reads like they tried to replicate 100% of the features in a big monolithic application, which is rather time consuming. :\
When I start a rewrite I check which are the essential features and try to iterate my way to 100% (sometimes the 100% aren't even needed) with many small releases, but every executive fears "rewrites" like the devil....
Sadly, this often leads to a 50% rewrite where key features are missing because I he rewrite team ran out of budget or willingness to code the non-fun parts. Which drives users to misery or competitors.
But I have the feeling, that a prio-list of the needed features is all that is needed.
People say what they need, you implement it, done.
I mean the way other companies steal your customers IS that they implement a better version of stuff you did. So it's either, they do the rewrite (in their case a first write) or you.
I like functions that return a value to be written in the guard-clause style. [In C++, that's probably better for efficiency since the compiler optimizer doesn't have to remove temporaries by converting the code to guard-clause style.]
However, I'm not convinced that void functions are better written in the guard-clause style. I think the intent of the code is better expressed with nested ifs. Of course, try to factor the ifs so that they're readable.
I'm saying this is more readable if the "do something part" is less than about 15 lines. Thoughts?
void do_something(input) {
if (!input.already_done()) {
// do something.
}
}
The "on your system" part is what prevents this from happening. However, with features like remote attestation, a DRM platform could be built. If users start accepting PCs locked down like tablets, then this might be an issue.
I'm not sure I follow. The DRM extensions are basically hooks to proprietary plugins. If the plugin decides that you didn't view the ad, then it will refuse to play to request media.
Then can and will be workarounds, but thanks to lobbying those workaround are criminal in many parts of the world.
At the moment, those proprietary plugins execute inside an OS and processor you "fully" control. Nothing really stops you from flipping a jump statement. (Except being more complicated than that.) I believe that's what the poster was saying: what can force him on his own system.
No story here. No budget provider I've looked at says they will help you withstand a DDoS attack. [Thanks to the commenter who says OVH does, I will look into them closely.]
I did this due diligence for a 10-user app. These guys have no excuse for not planning for a DDoS with a serious business.
I had zero problems reading the print version.