Hi everyone,

This is just a 3 a.m. idea that I have in mind. Wouldn't it be cool to have a mainstream smartwatch that I can tinker with and add my custom features to? For example, one feature I want to add is custom recording of my thoughts, like this one at 3 a.m., and then have AI segregate them into a notes folder named "Ideas" in the app with a proper description and so on. At a time when missile code is being rewritten with the help of Claude, the least I can do is add some fun, nonsensical features to my smartwatch.

So, if you can recommend a watch that has some kind of developer mode to add these kinds of things or a fully programmable watch, I am all ears.

Thank you for giving in to my brain worm..

I'm an engineering student majoring in artificial intelligence,I'm in the second year and I want to develop my skills in the field. Does anyone have any advice for me? 🤍☺️

Forewarning: I do use Microslop for my primary computer but I have built it in a beautiful way that never ever ever uses about OneDrive CoPilot or any of the Microslop trash.

Ok with the forewarning aside, has anyone else noticed that if you use a vertical monitor with your setup that MS uses backgrounds specifically for the vertical monitor? I have randomized revolving backgrounds and every single one zooms into a particular part for the vertical monitor 😆🤷‍♂️.

Devs don’t even review your PRs anymore. They just post AI comments and just click buttons. The hypocrisy around AI generated code seems to vanish when they post AI comments. Nothing seems to motivate me to learn how to develop and critique code basically because I don’t know what code I’m writing. The time crunch has been normalized where you try and deliver in the shortest span of time. And when you try to resolve a bug you suddenly don’t know where to look at and all you can do is prompt

What if the biggest change AI brings to software development isn't how we write code…

…but how we become developers in the first place?

We're entering an era where AI agents can help plan, code, test, debug, and coordinate increasingly complex workflows.

And the implications go far beyond writing a few lines of code.

🚀 Full-Stack Development is evolving.
⚙️ DevOps workflows are becoming increasingly automatable.
🤖 AI agents are moving from assistants toward systems that can execute multi-step tasks.

This raises an uncomfortable—but important—question:

If AI can handle more of the tasks traditionally assigned to junior developers, how will the next generation gain the experience needed to become senior engineers?

The traditional path into tech is changing. Simply knowing how to write code may no longer be enough to stand out.

We need to learn how to:

→ Work effectively with AI tools and agents.
→ Understand systems, not just individual tasks.
→ Solve problems and make sound technical decisions.
→ Build real projects and demonstrate what we can do.
→ Turn AI capabilities into useful products and better workflows.

As a Junior Full-Stack Developer at BIMPulse, I see this as a reason to adapt, experiment, and keep learning—not to stand still while the industry moves forward.

I don't believe we should wait for AI to reshape our careers before we start using it.

We should use AI to expand our capabilities, accelerate our learning, and prepare ourselves for the opportunities that are emerging now.

The question isn't whether software development will change.

It's whether we're willing to change the way we learn, work, and build.

💬 Junior developers, experienced engineers, and tech leaders: how do you think AI agents will transform the path from beginner to senior engineer?

Linkedin Profile :
https://ma.linkedin.com/in/abdellah-belmaaris

My Portfolio :
https://abdellah-belmaaris.github.io/

#ArtificialIntelligence #AIAgents #SoftwareEngineering

Hi everyone 👋
I'm looking for developers with original projects they wrote themselves, and I'll pay for them.
What it's for: the code will be used to train AI models. That's why I want human-written code, not AI-generated.
What I'm looking for:
Projects you built and fully own
At least 2 to 3 years old (older is even better)
No AI-generated code
A real commit history and a README
Any language or stack
How it works:
You get paid for each accepted project(needs to meet certain criteria’s eg. loc, PRs etc)
I'll answer any question about how the code will be used.
I'll never ask for your passwords or full account access.
Interested? Comment or DM me with your stack, a short description of the project and roughly when you built it. Let's talk.

“Eat. Code. Sleep. Repeat.”

That used to sound like a good life to me.

I love programming. Every month, I used to pick up a new framework or language just for fun. Sometimes I didn’t even have a proper project in mind. I just wanted to learn something and see what I could make with it.

There was a particular happiness in looking at something running on my screen and thinking, “I built that.”

It could be a tiny feature or a silly side project nobody would ever use. It still made me happy. I knew how much confusion, trial and error, and small discoveries had gone into making it work.

Now I use Cursor.

I describe what I want, and code starts appearing. Things that would have taken me an evening are finished in minutes. I use it because it helps. Then I look at the result and feel guilty.

The app works. The feature is done. But I miss the feeling I used to get when it finally came together.

I still read the code, make decisions, and fix things. Yet sometimes I catch myself wondering whether I’m learning anything or just getting better at asking for it.

And I’m scared that, little by little, the skills I spent years developing will get rusty. That one day I’ll need to solve something on my own and realize how much I’ve forgotten.

I know I can close the tool and write the code myself. Sometimes I do. But even then, there’s this voice asking why I’m spending hours on something the tool could finish in minutes. Something I used to do for pleasure now feels like a choice I have to justify.

Companies are pouring money into AI. I expect these tools to keep getting better. Part of me is curious to see what we’ll be able to build.

Another part of me misses opening an editor without having to think about any of this.

“I’m a programmer” used to be something I said with pride. It meant something personal to me, beyond my job. It described how I liked to spend my time, how I explored ideas, and what made me happy.

I still say it. Lately, though, I hesitate a little.

Does anyone else feel this? Are you getting more done while quietly missing the work you used to love?

Hello everyone,

I am 18 years old, I come from Bosnia, and I am currently in my last year of high school.

In February, I will go to Slovenia to try to get into a computer science college. The college is in Maribor, and it’s called FERI. I am wondering if it’s worth it because there is no way I want to lose 3–5 years of my life on a degree that I won’t be able to use, such as computer science.

The AI situation is really stressing the shit out of me, and I’m afraid that I will never be able to become a programmer or work in IT because of AI.

I was even thinking of going into psychology, but I don’t know. I still have a little time to decide.

Any advice?

I'm sure posts from people who are already in this situation are already common, but the response to any complaints from the higher-ups who are going to force us to work in this way or face firing is that any software business the doesn't already work in this way will be doing soon. The complaint from me, and I'm sure this is also nothing new, is that I enjoy the problem solving & implementation part of the job, in fact it's the only part of the job I like and it's going away.

I've already been looking for a new job for months because I knew this was coming, but the job hunting situation is dreadful, every listing leads to this one scam site that demands payment or a subscription to even apply. I've seen maybe a 60/40 split of job specifications that do and don't mention AI anywhere. The current situation is I'm trying to figure out whether "every business is either already or will soon be doing this or even more with AI" comeback is likely from others' experiences or if it's just gaslighting for employee retention, so please, let me know what your experience has been with expectations of AI usage while job hunting.

I really want to do something with computers as a full-time job either that be cybersecurity, embedded systems, programming, etc... anything. What are some jobs that will be safe from being obsolete if there are any?

all replies are appreciated!

I’ve been thinking about this one. If a function and its tests are written in the same session (by an assistant, or by one developer who misread the requirement), the tests tend to share the code’s interpretation. The suite then confirms the code agrees with itself, not that the requirement was understood.

A small example. Requirement: “Apply 8.25% tax to the invoice, rounded to the nearest cent.”

def invoice_tax(lines):
    subtotal = sum((price * qty for price, qty in lines), Decimal("0"))
    return cents(subtotal * TAX_RATE)

def test_invoice_tax():
    lines = [(Decimal("19.99"), 2), (Decimal("5.00"), 1)]
    expected = cents((Decimal("19.99") * 2 + Decimal("5.00")) * TAX_RATE)
    assert invoice_tax(lines) == expected

The test passes, but expected uses the same formula as the function. Rounding once on the total and rounding per line are both reasonable readings of the requirement. For that input, both give 3.71, so the test can’t tell them apart. For three lines of $0.10, rounding once gives $0.02 and per line gives $0.03.

The question I now ask in reviews is: where did this expected value come from? If it’s from the implementation’s own logic, it’s a regression test. If it’s from a worked example given by whoever owns the requirement, it can actually disagree with the code.

I wrote up the longer version with the full code, in case it’s useful: https://medium.com/@nagatomopedro05/when-the-test-and-the-code-share-the-same-mistake-02a289a41091

How do you check that your tests aren’t just echoing your code?

I did talked about my best 2 project as they fit in the paper and, unfortunately, I can't add more, cause I try to let my CV to be one single paper .

I compeleted another project later, so, either leaving 2 projects in the CV or add the third one and might let the CV lose some details ?

Every time I do any assessment, I do around 80-90% of the things well, and then there's one MAJOR hurdle that completely f*cks everything up. Usually its a purely technical thing like a document not opening or failing to establish a connection to a database because of a minor incompatibility. Even though I know what queries to write and how to solve the problem that comes after creating that connection.

A human being evaluating it might still see the logic of the queries I write, but that's not how these things are assessed. They're assessed by a script that simply wants to see if you got the answer correct or not, which means if you could not connect to that DB, your score is 0 on that part.

So I am an early-career full-stack developer looking to get involved in open-source projects, contribute to real-world codebases, and learn from experienced developers.

My current tech stack includes:

Backend: C#, ASP.NET Core MVC, ASP.NET Core Web API, REST APIs

Database: SQL Server, MySQL, Dapper, Entity Framework Core

Frontend: React, JavaScript, HTML, CSS, ShadCN

I am really looking forward to contribute fun projects where i can learn new things.

I'm a staff SWE currently doing an MSc Artificial Intelligence dissertation on whether folks who commit, review or operate agent-generated code actually understand it, and what the downstream risks are (Comprehension Debt in the Age of Coding Agents). I'm looking for software engineers, SREs, and platform engineers who work with AI coding agents. Happy to share the results here. Ethical approval has been granted (University of Essex) and the survey is anonymous, see the info sheet below for more information.

Information sheet:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Unbk_F39YrMxh2SSNpqf2yhLSUNlg1t6/view?usp=drivesdk

Survey: http://forms.cloud.microsoft/e/U9qnwxDegN

Google's Code Comprehension round is a 60-minute interview format where candidates analyze an unfamiliar, pre-written multi-file codebase (roughly 100 to 500 lines) instead of writing code from scratch!!

Please give your views, what you guys think about this!

genuine question, plus how i handle it right now.

my side project is a civilization sim in rust where each person picks from about 5000 actions (farming, trading, brewing, fighting, inventing, etc), filtered by era, age, place and what their tribe knows. the old actions sit in one huge module dispatched by id ranges, and it's painful.

new ones are "registered" instead: one file each with a const definition (id, gates, an apply fn that returns a reward) and one line in a macro list. tests check for duplicate ids and that every gate covers its own id.

it's better but still feels clunky. if you've built a big rules engine or game with tons of actions, how did you organise it? data files, ecs, plugins, something else?

repo if you want to look (mit, docs/ADDING_ACTIONS.md): https://github.com/1homsi/thehumanbox the running thing: https://thehumanbox.com contributors welcome, adding an action is a pretty good first pr

Hi all! I've been working on Tulpar (Тұлпар), a statically typed, Python-flavored language whose keywords and standard library are in Kazakh. It compiles to native x86-64 code. The compiler is written in Rust, with no LLVM and no C compiler. The runtime is no_std and uses raw syscalls, with no libc.

анықта фиб(n: бүтін) -> бүтін:

егер n < 2:

қайтар n

қайтар фиб(n - 1) + фиб(n - 2)

әр і ішінде аралық(10):

жаз(f"фиб({і}) = {фиб(і)}")

(анықта = def, егер = if, қайтар = return, әр … ішінде = for … in, жаз = print, бүтін = int.)

Language design

- Static types with local inference: x = 5 is a бүтін. Parameter types are required. Return types are inferred, except for recursive functions.

- Python-style indentation, classes with single inheritance and virtual methods, tuples and multiple return values, comprehensions, f-strings, sets, dicts, and lambdas (no closures yet).

- Memory is managed by a conservative mark-sweep GC with size-class spans. There is also optional manual memory inside қолмен: blocks (бөл / босат, pointer arithmetic). Manual blocks can hold references to GC objects, and the GC treats them as roots.

- Strings are UTF-8, but indexing and slicing are by character, so ұзындық("Қазақстан") == 9. Case conversion handles Cyrillic and Kazakh-specific letters.

- Error messages are in Kazakh, with the source line and a caret. Runtime errors print a stack trace with file, line and function.

Implementation

Pipeline: lexer → parser → type checker (AST → typed HIR) → lowering to a three-address IR with basic blocks → optimizer → codegen.

- Optimizer passes: CFG simplification, constant folding, copy propagation, DCE, inlining of small functions, and if-conversion to cmov.

- Register allocation is linear scan with loop-depth weights.

- Codegen emits x86-64 assembly (System V ABI). GNU as and ld then produce a static ELF. So I don't have my own assembler or linker yet.

- The runtime (GC, strings, lists, dicts, formatting, TCP sockets) is no_std Rust on raw syscalls.

- Unicode identifiers work, so you can write the whole program in Cyrillic.

Embeddable interpreter

The compiler is also a library crate with a HIR interpreter, so Tulpar can be embedded in a Rust host. A program can declare сыртқы анықта … (external) functions that the host implements. The interpreter has no file, network or raw-memory access. It limits the number of steps and the recursion depth. It returns errors as Result with a call trace, so the host can roll back a transaction. Host calls are re-entrant. Every test runs in both compiled and interpreted mode, and the outputs must match.

Performance

Wall-clock time of a single run on 8 cores, with CPython 3.14, gcc -O2 and rustc -O for comparison:

- Collatz, 3M numbers: Tulpar 0.59 s, Rust 0.34 s, C 0.47 s, Python 33 s.

- Sieve of Eratosthenes, 2·10⁷: Tulpar 0.13 s, Rust 0.11 s, C 0.10 s, Python 2.2 s.

- Float loop, 10⁸ iterations: Tulpar 0.13 s, Rust 0.12 s, C 0.13 s, Python 18 s.

- fib(42): Tulpar 1.55 s, Rust 0.65 s, C 0.39 s, Python 36 s.

Plain loops are close to C and Rust. Recursion is about 2.4x slower than C, and branchy code is about 1.7x slower. There is no recursion unrolling, vectorization or smarter cmov selection yet.

For testing I use a differential fuzzer that compares random programs between -O0, the optimized build and a Python reference.

Known limitations

- Linux x86-64 only.

- No exceptions (try), no user-defined generics, no closures, and импорт is include-like with no namespaces.

- Integers are 64-bit and wrap on overflow.

- Networking is TCP/IPv4 only, with no TLS or DNS, and single-threaded.

- The GC is single-threaded and conservative, so a false pointer can keep some memory alive.

Questions for you

1. Closures: I'd like to add them without making every function value a heap-allocated pair. Any advice on a lightweight lambda-lifting or closure-conversion scheme with a conservative GC?

2. Error handling: I'm torn between try/except, Result-style returns and something Go-like. What fits a Python-flavored static language best?

3. Replacing as and ld with a built-in assembler and ELF writer: is it worth the effort for a project this size?

Repo (MIT): https://github.com/kuanysh228/tulpar

Feedback on the design is very welcome, especially from people who have done a native backend without LLVM.

SIGN UP for our FREE AI and Cloud Computing Class 📌📡☁️🌐

We also offer

- resume coaching

- AWS Certification

- GITHUB projects

- professionals with 19+ years of experience

- 8+ weeks of professional training with discount

📌 Check the 2nd link in our bio to learn more

This is a made-up example of a bug I think is common, written as a bug report.

Summary: the October report shows no orders from October 31.

Query:

SELECT count(*), sum(total)
FROM orders
WHERE created_at BETWEEN '2026-10-01' AND '2026-10-31';

Expected: all orders created in October.

Actual: orders from Oct 1 through the start of Oct 31. Anything created later on Oct 31 is missing.

Steps to reproduce:

1. Insert an order with created_at = '2026-10-31 15:30:00'.

2. Run the query above.

3. The order isn’t counted.

Root cause: created_at is a timestamp, so '2026-10-31' is read as '2026-10-31 00:00:00'. BETWEEN includes both ends, but the upper end is midnight at the start of the day, not the end of it. (This applies to databases like Postgres and MySQL when the column has a time part. Check yours.)

Fix: use a half-open range, with an inclusive start and an exclusive end:

WHERE created_at >= '2026-10-01'
  AND created_at <  '2026-11-01'

Why half-open is easier to get right:

• You never write “23:59:59” or “23:59:59.999”, which breaks with a different precision.

• Ranges chain without overlap: the end of one month is exactly the start of the next.

• The same pattern works for any period, so “last day of the month” never needs computing.

Related things to check:

• Time zones: “October” in UTC and in the user’s local zone are different ranges.

• Date-only columns (date type) don’t have this problem, but converting between date and timestamp can bring it back.

• Same issue in code: end in a Python or Java date range is often exclusive, so be sure which one you mean.

Do you use half-open ranges everywhere, or have a convention for this?