It is usable with an IDE. Also it forces OO and interfaces down your throat, which is important when picking up other languages.
The other languages you'd choose to learn in the "Java" slot are:
- C++. I like new programmers too much to suggest this. Even if they know C.
- golang - Not a bad choice, but forced OO is a good thing to learn.
- C# - I haven't done enough of it, but it felt like Java on the CLR to me. Maybe with some warts moved around.
- Common Lisp: Too obscure, too alien to read.
- rust - No... just no. Too early.
- ML, Haskell and friends - Yes, I love you all. But... Understanding a simple type systems is important before taking on Hindley-Milner type system language.
So I'm kinda stuck with Java. It sucks the least. :)
This video covers a particular type of transistor known as the Bipolar Junction Transistors (BJTs). These are more commonly used in analog applications like amplification and signal processing rather than digital logic (though they can be used in specialized digital logic circuits).
Today, field effect transistors (FETs) reign supreme for most IC applications such as CPUs and digital logic as they're more scalable and efficient than BJTs and have a very different structural design.
> In fact, they invented a new part that has the "input" gate of an FET and the Collector-Emitter "output" of a BJT!
IGBTs are far from being a new invention.
And if we are speaking strictly, very high currents aren't switched with higher net efficiency by BJT than FET.
The reason SCR type devices are used for the kiloamperes range switches is due to them being the only switches which can mechanically/thermally handle so much current.
But for high voltages, bipolars will indeed go higher than FETs.
In "on" mode, FETs appear as a small resistance R_ds_on, but BJTs act like a mostly-constant voltage drop V_ce_sat.
So for any BJT and FET we compare, passing a current less than V_ce_sat/R_ds_on is more efficient on the FET, and for greater currents the BJT is more efficient.
Depending on voltage. Extremely low RDs ON FETs are there. The real world choice would depend on whether you just need a constantly open switch, or high frequency switching for power conversion.
FETs and BJTs are both common for analog. Discrete analog tends to prefer BJTs, which (among other features) have much higher transconductance, which you can never get enough of. FETs offer ultra-high input impedance, better performance at low power (though BJTs ain't all bad there), and the big one... they're built on CMOS processes. That means you can integrate your analog stuff with a giant pile of digital logic, which is a tremendously useful thing to do. (But the analog section alone often would be better if it were on a bipolar process.) Op-amps are split evenly between both types. Okay, evenly-ish.
It sounds like you're describing a Readme file -- which by convention can exist as documentation for any folder and not just the project root. It's not adopted by all codebases but is becoming more common as source browsers like Github will render the readme as rich text when navigating to the folder.
Yep. For some of the larger projects that I've worked on, I've gotten into the habit of adding folder level READMEs. I don't know if anyone else has benefited from them, but I certainly have myself when I need to remind myself of some context or pitfalls.
Having a sensible folder structure and good folder names is nice, but taking a few minutes to write individual READMEs can make a repo even easier to understand.
readme files might be the natural place for them but in practice readme files sort of tell you about the project, the author, the purpose, examples of what it can do and maybe how to install it.
It rarely gives you what is in each folder, and what part of the functionality each folder handles, although perhaps we should try to change the conventions of readme files to include file structure.
edit: I mean the root readme might contain what is in each folder so you don't have to click on each one to see which one you want to start with.
The short answer is no, the architectures don't transfer. At least not today. Biological neurons are much more complex, and therefore behave quite differently from neurons in neural networks.
To put things in perspective, we've fully mapped the connectome (map of neuron connections) of the simplest animal, C. Elegans, which has only about 300 neurons, yet we still can't simulate this organism's behavior computationally.
Last I knew, OpenWorm was making good progress on the nervous system simulations, though. IIRC they’ve demonstrated swimming, retracting when bumping into walls, and food-seeking.
You can't give employees the power to filter content then label them as "rogue" when a bias inevitably emerges. Obviously any innate biases (overt or not) will influence what gets filtered.
Exactly. This outcome was clear. FB handled this astonishingly poorly and now it looks like they were lying the whole time. Which honestly I'd probably true since it's so obvious that personal bias would enter.
If you're running an application that runs on more than one server it's definitely worth checking out AWS OpsWorks. It's a huge time saver and extremely useful in integrating and managing setup, configuration, and deployment across a server/db/cache etc without any loss of control or customization.
I've used Figaro for a few projects and I've found myself very happy with it. It does one thing well without adding unnecessary complexity or overhead to my app. I feel that figaro-like capability in Rails is a win for the community and for figaro/laserlemon as well.
Very true. It's also miserable with an IDE.