I would buy a license, but it seems version 15 should be coming out soon based upon previous releases. Even with a 30% discount might be better to wait until the new release.
The wife started trying raise Monarch butterflies this year. We bought a great deal of milkweed plants, about 25 pots. Every day she would tend to the milkweed then brings in any caterpillar or larva she finds. Throughout the last seven months the number one issue our Monarch population faced was the Tachinid flies.
I don't know the exact number of larva eggs and caterpillars she brought into the house, but an educated guess would be around 250. The vast majority of the Monarch population was decimated by the Tachinid flies. I would say about 85% of them died as a result of the flies. Another cause we witness is when a caterpillar would expel green liquid then die. Still not sure the cause of them. Most info I could find pointed to toxins, like weed killer. We would wash the leaves after first reading about the toxins, but the caterpillars would still succumb.
In the end, I think only about 20-25 were well enough to be released. It has been very disheartening to see so many of them die.
The police did have a no-knock warrant, but they did decide to announce themselves. It was her boyfriend that started shooting first then the law enforcement returned fire. Yes, let's call a spade a spade, her boyfriend was the cause of her death and even tried to blame her after the fact.
I bought into Google Pay back when they had the intro price of $7.99 a month and have kept it ever since. I don't really listen to Google Play, but every now and then I do. The primary reason why I keep it is so I don't have to watch the ads. For me, the cost of $7.99 is well worth not having to listen to the ads. I know not everyone would feel the same.
Points taken. The CCP controls all media, the story, and the narrative. I personally don't see the infected nor the deaths in the US, but this information is disseminated through via media who gets there data from the CDC and other government agencies. The CCP hide the details about the outbreak for some time and only got out via individuals who broke the news at severe fear of being punished by the CCP.
I do work with people in China, who doesn't these days, right? They report the same thing I see which is I don't see the infected or deaths directly, unless working in health care. My industry is tech so the individuals that I work with will not have first hand accounts. They only know what the CCP informs the public and we all know it is a well formulated narrative.
I believe we will never know the true depths until the CCP is finally overthrown and details are released after that time.
No sane person believes the numbers coming out of China. As countries start testing more for the virus the numbers will continue to grow. Very easy for a countries line to flat line if you don't test for it.
Recently I was looking at their laptops, but with a resolution of only 1920x1080, unless I wanted to buy one of the thicker laptops, was a deal breaker. Perhaps once they start making their own they will bump up the resolution, but until then I will wait.
I had used UltraEdit Studio for years, but with some changes to the UI (yes, can always go back to toolbars), but the intellisense couldn't handle mixed C and C++ projects at all. Thankfully, VSCode came out about that time. Large majority of my office use VS Code.
This release is especially helpful to me, along with the remote tools updated. Prior to this release bundle one would need to type in their password twice, but they have reduced it to just once. There is still improvement to be made in this regards. For example, when switching projects it will prompt for a password again. Essentially opening a new instance, but if they can use the same instance so I don't need to retype my password.
The only download side I have encountered recently is their C/C++ Tools as the parsing seems to have issues. Still, over all a fantastic code editor.
The results may be slightly skewed towards the languages/market segments their tools target. I have been an embedded developer since the late 90's and have a CLion license, but since they don't fully support Make files out of the box this tool doesn't fit within my development flow. One of the problems with CLion is its steadfast reliance on the output of the build to support CTAGS/Intellisense (sorry, I forget their specific terminology).
In the various industries I have worked in DO-178B, industrial controls/IEC-61508, and storage the one consistency shared by managers is meeting schedules and milestones. Generally, a manager's insight to development/engineering is for the product to be just good enough. Developers/engineers have a tendency to over engineer the solution. Good peer reviews have the most influence on software quality as does independent testing. Managers rarely have little impact that I have witness over my 25 year career, thus far. For industries that adhere to DO-178B or IEC-61508 guidelines, it is the process that imbues greatly improved quality.
In years past I worked for a couple different aerospace companies. Optimization for the tools had to be turned off, period! As sbradford26 mentioned, this was need for verification, especially for Software Verification Cases & Procedures document (SVCP). This is especially important for Level A. I worked on Level B LRUs.
The projects steered clear of C++ given there is a lot of code generated that is not easily trace to the written source if using C++ features (constructors and polymorphism as a couple examples). Yes, there are companies out there that do use C++ for aerospace, but I never worked at a company that did. The project also used in-house schedulers/executives. Boeing highly suggested to that company I was at, early 2000's, not to use a commercial RTOS (even a verified ones from companies like Green Hills or VxWorks). All companies developed a schedule/executive that suited the needs of the projects, but they were all very similar in the end.
I also worked at a company that developed solutions for industrial controls and they follow a similar path to DO-178B/C guidelines. The company followed IEC 61508 which had a very similar flow to DO-178B. All products, except one that was not safety critical, used C and used an in-house scheduler/executive also.
"Source to Object Code Trace Analysis (Level A Only)
The compiler converts the Source Code into assembly object code before it is compatible with the target computer. For DAL A software, it is required to provide assurance that all assembly object code generated by the compiler is traceable to the source code. Any assembly object code that is not traceable directly to the source code requires additional verification to be performed in order to provide safety assurance and the absence of unintended behavior."
Edit: For most projects, at least the ones I was on, 50% of the budget was allocated for validation/verification. Thus, reducing the additional work to verify code that was not directly related to source is always desired. One prime reason not to use C++.
From the article, Cmdr. Bill Speaks, a Navy spokesman, said, “There are measures in place that require companies to notify the government when a ‘cyber incident’ has occurred that has actual or potential adverse effects on their networks that contain controlled unclassified information.”
This does not indicate the data was or was not classified. Now, at the beginning of the article, "The data stolen was of a highly sensitive nature despite being housed on the contractor’s unclassified network. The officials said the material, when aggregated, could be considered classified, a fact that raises concerns about the Navy’s ability to oversee contractors tasked with developing cutting-edge weapons."
The article suggest the data, in aggregated form, could be viewed as classified. I am quite sure not all the details have been made public nor will they be for some time. I am sure it will take many years for that true nature of the breach to enter public domain. Submarines are the US primary means of nuclear deterrence and any breach to limit that deterrence might be considered harmful.