I've only been a hiring manager once, and it was for a junior-level position so take that into account.
When I read resumes, accomplishments meant next to nothing to me. I was looking for capabilities.
Your EC2 example is probably an exception to what I'm about to say because EC2 is very well known and you can quantify the difference you made in real dollars. But, 99% of the time I have no frame of reference and therefore no way to evaluate claimed accomplishments on a resume.
Oh, you managed accounts totaling $24MM in accrued receivables annually? Sounds impressive, but what if every one of your peers were managing $30–40MM and you were well known to be a slacker? Etc.
It's much more useful to me to know what classes of problem you can solve and which tools / techniques / technologies you're proficient with toward solving them. Descriptive statistics do very little for me.
> and you were well known to be a slacker?
> what classes of problem
If people are going to lie on their resume there isn't a whole lot of anything you can do to fix that at the resume evaluation level. So many resumes have 100x skills where they say they know some language because they happen to walk by a room where someone might have been looking at the wikipedia page describing someone who might have used the language once accidentally.
If you can't relate the impact / accomplishment of the candidate for your job to your company,then that just speaks to a low quality resume. It should be obvious to any reviewer why what you did is relevant to their interest.
The reason why impact matters is that in some sense it should be theoretically reproducible. "Saved 100s of engineering hours by fixing some nonsense" which if true should speak to someone who can ostensibly save time while also understand the meaning of their work.
I'm really dumb, genuinely asking the question—when people do such things, where are they generally running the actual code? Would it be in a VM on generally available infra that their company provides...? Or like... On a spare laptop under their desk? I have use cases for similar things (more valid use cases than this one, at least my smooth brain likes to think) but I literally don't know how to deploy it once it's written. I've never been shown or done it before.
Typically you run both the client program and the server program on your computer during development. Even though they're running on the same machine they can talk with one another using http as if they were both on the world wide web.
Then you deploy the server program, and then you deploy the client program, to another machine, or machines, where they continue to talk to one another over http, maybe over the public Internet or maybe not.
Deploying can mean any one of umpteen possible things. In general, you (use automations that) copy your programs over to dedicated machines that then run your programs.
Mostly irrelevant to me. Maybe a tiny bit more *if* that means it comes with more RAM at the base price (as with "Copilot+ PC"s starting with a minimum of 16GB).
In my so far very limited experience, Zig is very intentionally verbose at almost every opportunity. This isn't what some people want in a language, and I get that. But because they're SO consistent about it, Zig does end up with this effect of almost "no news is good news." Like, when something seems straight-forward it's because it literally is—if they could've been more verbose about it they would've been. So you can sorta trust that, even to the point of absence of verbosity being meaningful data point.
I enjoy Lisp and Lisp-alike languages specifically because with the right editor support you can do a lot of this kind of structural editing stuff without giving up the niceties of source code as text.
Yeah in emacs with paredit/smartparens/parinfer or whatever, it is both text and structure. With parinfer you change the text and the structure gets modified to match. With the other two you can change the structure directly with a command that has a silly but descriptive name like slurp or barf.
While they're very good compared to the alternatives, I wonder why they haven't pushed more into that direction, e.g. what I've wanted to put into a plugin when tinkering with the PSI was simple composable operations, similar to Vim operations, like "rotate if/else branch" (while correctly negating and simplifying the test expression), or "convert if to case/switch/..." (and back and only if it's feasible).
Here's my opinion: there's actually two very different use cases here. Most apps I've tried do not distinguish between the two and that, for me, is their downfall.
Sometimes, you're in the moment trying to make a decision about whether or how much to spend. Call that use 1. And sometimes you're looking back at your spending history needing to make some sense of what has already happened. Call that use 2.
For use 1, I have started using Paktol[0], a weirdly-named phone app made by the guys who created ClojureDart[1] (and written in that Clojure dialect). It's extremely simple, and that's the point. You set a target amount of discretionary spending each day, and it tells you how much you have left or whether you're "overdrawn" for the day. That's it. There's no categories, no analytics, nothing like that. You just plug in every expense that's discretionary and it tells you if you're on track. It's so simple it almost annoys me that it's paid. But it's working and no other money tracking app I've ever tried has. It has already paid for itself in better decision-making on my part for having it, so I actually can't complain.
For the second function, I'm just using Excel. I have my own cobbled-together categorization system that's working well enough, and aside from having to go download transactions manually from my different accounts because they don't have an API, the bulk of the categorization work for new entries is automatic (Power Query is very cool).
Part of me wonders what an all-in-one solution could look like and I daydream for ten minutes about making one myself. But that never lasts more than a minute or two. There's a reason so many have tried and failed. I'm not smarter than any of the hundreds of people who have already tried and only partly succeeded.
Ah, that makes sense! I googled it and the only thing I found spelling it the way the app does is that it's a word meaning "sorcery" in a language from the Philippines that I've never heard of before this...
When I read resumes, accomplishments meant next to nothing to me. I was looking for capabilities.
Your EC2 example is probably an exception to what I'm about to say because EC2 is very well known and you can quantify the difference you made in real dollars. But, 99% of the time I have no frame of reference and therefore no way to evaluate claimed accomplishments on a resume.
Oh, you managed accounts totaling $24MM in accrued receivables annually? Sounds impressive, but what if every one of your peers were managing $30–40MM and you were well known to be a slacker? Etc.
It's much more useful to me to know what classes of problem you can solve and which tools / techniques / technologies you're proficient with toward solving them. Descriptive statistics do very little for me.