The language server protocol is diametrically opposite to the way that IntelliJ works. For each language, IntelliJ builds its own internal representation (PSI) of the source code. There are a lot of language specific things, but there are also a lot of commonalities between languages.
I have no idea how you would morph (say) IntelliJ's Java support to use a LSP without basically throwing everything away and starting over.
Caveat: I never worked at Jetbrains, but I did work for two years supporting Android Studio and IntelliJ at Google, which involved a lot of work in its internals.
This proposal is fundamentally different from C++ templates as they exist today. You don't just chuck a type in there and let the compiler have a go at it, SFINAE style.
The major difference is the first proposal separated interfaces from concepts, later proposals (very wisely) unified them. Only concepts could be used in type constraints.
They also switched from parenthesis () to square brackets [], thankfully.
Australian minimum wage is about 15 USD per hour, which is a wage that can sustain people if they do not spend excessively. The economy is not tanking, the same type of jobs exist. Are you claiming that the Australian standard of living is generally horrible as a result of this? That it would otherwise be better for everyone if there were no minimum wage?
Yeah fair point. At Google a lot of these non-deterministic rules are either banned through "date" just not existing on remote execution machines, or through determinism tests that ensure rules behave. Maybe in real-life scenarios it's not as easy as I claim, as you suggest.
My full time job was to make Bazel more efficient for about 1.5 years. The answer is: it really depends.
If you are executing 100,000 novel parallel C++ actions, then compilation for that might be I/O bound? If these actions are all cached though you would likely be CPU bound instead, as the build system works hard to discover that all the work is already done.
I haven't had many issues with non-determinism when using Bazel/Blaze? Especially when you use remote execution or sandboxing it's pretty hard to avoid being hermetic.
I lost my Pixel 3 recently and upgraded to a Pixel 4 (but had a Pixel 1 as well). You skipped right to the worst incarnation - no fingerprint unlock, mediocre battery life.
You have to work extra hard and give up language niceties to reduce allocations, more so than certain other languages that are more value oriented.
You want an List<T> of objects? It's now a list of pointers to individual allocations. You want a Path class instead of just passing strings around, for type safety? One extra allocation per object.
Make sure you visit Sydney specifically though, it's a bit different from the rest of Australia. It's not everyone's cup of tea, though you may well end up loving it.
You can do whatever you want if it has no commercial value. Google would not bother asserting their rights because your experiments will not grow into a competitor they would care about.
This is for serious side ventures, like you creating a self driving car company on the side. Use common sense, fault on the side of disclosure, and you'll be alright.
It's the default at Google, but if you want to have an open source project or even a side business you can. You have to disclose it first and get sign-off. This seems reasonable to me and avoids any grey areas.
I mapped all the programming keys to the alphabetic keys accessible via a third shift state. That buys me 24 symbol keys. Been using it for more than 10 years, works a treat.
Me and my team made that plugin. It initially came from the same org that makes Bazel (rather than the other way around), but I think there's now a small team in the Android org that support it.
Nevertheless, Gradle is currently much more popular than Bazel for Android development so it makes sense that this is where the focus is.
The idea is that such situations are non life threatening. The vehicle will pull over and wait for a human operator.
It's not crazy to imagine that computers could handle split second decisions better than humans but choose to bail out to the side of the road if there's something they can't handle.
I have no idea how you would morph (say) IntelliJ's Java support to use a LSP without basically throwing everything away and starting over.
Caveat: I never worked at Jetbrains, but I did work for two years supporting Android Studio and IntelliJ at Google, which involved a lot of work in its internals.