emm...
All we could say is that,
kernel programmers'/reviewers' technical background is much higher/better than average python programmers'/reviewers'.
Seen too many times these "Mr/Mrs. More or less" engineers simply modify the internal states as short cuts to compensate real engineering.
kinda funny...
the talk is precise, touche, and cliche.
Like software engineering 101 from top-notched software companies.
Especially from those top-notched software companies which writing C++ code.
That is, if C++ were not coded in this way mentioned in this talk, the project is just doomed to fail.
But for Go Lang, even you don't coded in these mind sets, the project still works, and maintainable, just that, it's shit code.
and system isn't rocket science, it's been coded by good engineers knowing the limit thus gives you a good abstraction for you to learn it quickly.
that is, get hands dirty and start coding.
Look at those who were _so_ good at Novell's NetWare admin goes?
Loot at those who were _so_ good at openstack goes?
And no more longer, you can see those who were _so_ good at k8s goes XD
Look
the point is never to learn more, but to learn the essence.
there's only one basic language must to be learned by every top-notched engineer is assembly.
After that, it's just another layer of abstraction.
The concept is just stack + pointer to memory on heap, period.
Then, learn whatever language that you are currently need to use. Life is short, don't waste learning something that doesn't matters.
from compiler's point of view, C++ doesn't really added that much features, and quite stable. imho i believe the C++ ISO committee does consider the possibilities compiler writers are able to implement these features.
e.g lambda expression, there's always operator() overloaded available in C++98; Variable template, only allowed in namespace, aka. static member data member in template type;
CTAD, take template function argument deduce mechanism and wrap-up for ya; auto, same as template argument, and C++'s template argument is the same as C's typedef, etc.
that is to say, to some extend, C++'s features are also written in C++. The new idea could think of is the r-value type, which invented to trigger move constructor, again, using the existing function overloading mechanism to do the job. This maybe not engineering friendly which the writer has to manually nullify the moved object's internal pointers as for Rust just using type system to prevent you from using it.
imho he probably meant for experienced engineers we don't really care because knowing what's underneath is way more expert than learning another language/funny syntax which tries so hard using name mangling type system to hide it.
if you have 13 years experience and don't even have a bachelor's degree, you are not screwed, just stay where you are, unless you are as good as Linus T, just stay where you are, we have lots of talents with > 13years experience without a degree here in the US already :-)
more school != more skilled proxy should have it's range.
A rank 100+ cs grad school is quite obvious showing a person's learning skill if anyone knows how applying for a cs master in the USA works. One could argue a UCSC graduate doesn't have a good skill set but hardly to say a SIT graduate
has a better learning skill. And a SIT graduate is also a 'master' of science in cs, which is able to participate the 'advance' degree h1b lottery slot. How absurd..
define high-skilled workers.
Currently an steven's institute graduate cs master could get a h1b visa by lottery while a Harvard graduate might not be that lucky.
Consider this, is knowing how to use kubernetes anything harder than working in a Physics Lab? The system is flawed~~