This is almost what I need for my ancient meme folder

Reasonable and viable ≠ RFC compliant

This quote summarises my views:

There is some danger that common usage and widespread sloppy coding will establish a de facto standard for e-mail addresses that is more restrictive than the recorded formal standard.

Don’t worry, this idea is likely too complicated

What’s the story? I think I never heard of that

Chernobyl

But that was a really old tech, the plants built after 1990s shouldn’t allow this scale of pollution even if all the stops are pulled and everything breaks in the worst way possible

This is the ideal rendition, I would say. On a related note, I just love it when there are backspaces in my filenames

There are many regexes that validate email, and they usually aren’t compliant with the RFC, there are some details in the very old answer on SO. So, better not validate and just send a confirmation, than restrict and lock people out, imo

That’s true, there’s even a party game that consists solely of controversial topics to talk about, not even this kind of weird ones

Also a spin-off where Trolley Man cures incurable patients one by one using sacrifices of 5

Living with knowing you did nothing to save 4 people may affect you as badly. To be fair, the person doing the choice is fucked up both ways, if ey is not a sociopath.

testing oneself with fun hypotheticals

fun

you’ve got a peculiar taste for fun, I must admit

I kinda think it’s more to create contrast than to signify eating innocence

True hero’s move, really, retire and let others become heroes (half /s)

and which of these two you are going to get paid more for

It looks like exactly 4 characters are missing, so public and static would fit, but I never saw static instead of public static, so I think you’re right. On the other hand, I don’t use Java anymore and couldn’t be bothered about such details

Depends on what was the course about. If it’s about computation, then sure. If it’s about OOP or architecture design (this one I wouldn’t expect, unfortunately, but would be nice if it was taught somewhere), then the point is not just to run something.

I mostly come to prefer composition, this approach apparently even has a wiki page. But that’s in part because I use Rust that forbids inheritance, and don’t have such bullshit (from delegation wiki page):

class A {
    void foo() {
        // "this" also known under the names "current", "me" and "self" in other languages
        this.bar();
    }

    void bar() {
        print("a.bar");
    }
}

class B {
    private delegate A a; // delegation link

    public B(A a) {
        this.a = a;
    }

    void foo() {
        a.foo(); // call foo() on the a-instance
    }

    void bar() {
        print("b.bar");
    }
}

a = new A();
b = new B(a); // establish delegation between two objects

Calling b.foo() will result in b.bar being printed, since this refers to the original receiver object, b, within the context of a. The resulting ambiguity of this is referred to as object schizophrenia

Translating the implicit this into an explicit parameter, the call (in B, with a a delegate) a.foo() translates to A.foo(b), using the type of a for method resolution, but the delegating object b for the this argument.

Why would one substitute b as this when called from b.a is beyond me, seriously.

Even if it is not their fault, what people see is that they provide bad quality service. Very low percentage ofthem will care to read details when Netflix publishes a post-mortem of an issue, assuming they even do.

changing a provider is as simple as

making sure every single account you had that is tied to your email now points to a correct new one. And also informing every one of your contacts of the change, which is easier but also less efficient since half of them is going to miss the announcement and keep writing to an email that no longer exists

Oh, but ey wanted to be edgy and offensive