> IMHO GCC's special handling of memset() is broken
I appreciate how you've distinguished your opinion from objective facts. E.g. according to spec, it's not broken, but it's a perfectly valid opinion to hold that the spec is broken too. :-)
I think the most amusing case of UTF-16 considered harmful would possibly be the choice, in WPF/Xaml, to use UTF-16 code point offsets to reference positions in XML strings -- while supporting UTF-8 XML encoding. It can create the situation where, even if the input and output are both UTF-8, you'll nonetheless need to transcode into then out of UTF-16 in order to perform the proper string splitting.
What has me confused is how these automated take downs, without automated appeals, don't constitute fraud. I can't go down to the local county courthouse, spamming it with grossly erroneous and frivolous claims documents, and expect to just walk away. There are laws against that sort of thing.
Yup, I've seen this as well, way too often. Rather than a function, you get a class, rather than arguments you get constructor parameters, and then the get stuck at what to name the method that actually does anything.
I, too, am a parent (of two teen-age daughters). I agree with the parent. "Think of the children" is almost always an appeal to an emotional response to gain support for laws that are generally an attack on adult behavior. These laws are usually worded to be vague and carry an intention (though often not overtly stated) to apply to _all_ "taboo" behavior.
As mentioned elsewhere, we already have laws and punishment for sexual exploitation of children (and adults, for that matter). There's not need for special laws because the state isn't fond of a specific entity.
Yeah, there's also "an excellent opportunity arose," and "time for a new challenge," or "looking for a bigger/smaller, riskier/stable team/company/toaster/product.
Ditto. Also, from previous managers they may have learned that criticism, even constructive criticism, is a great way to bag a negative performance review. Such effects need to be accounted for.
I appreciate how you've distinguished your opinion from objective facts. E.g. according to spec, it's not broken, but it's a perfectly valid opinion to hold that the spec is broken too. :-)