You might not like it, but free climbing (no scare quotes required) is a defined term. It means climbing without the aid of ropes, except for safety. (Climbing without ropes is usually called free solo.)
Aid climbing means using ropes as aid - you can pull yourself up on ropes (and associated tools).
Quibble about the details as much as you like, it is still the hardest multipitch, bigwall, free climb ever achieved.
Not to mention that the definition becomes more loose when it comes to huge projects like this. One of the claimed free ascents of the Nose involved top roping two of the hardest pitches. Most people consider that a free ascent, even though that wouldn't generally be enough for an FFA of a single-pitch sport climb.
Another important outcome of a successful "hello, world!" is that you find some kind of MVP - Minimal Viable Printf.
Just because it is C doesn't mean you've got a sane libc. Let alone the luxury of a debugger. Just seeing that simple string on the screen/logfile can be a blessed relief.
You should probably check again, but in any case MSVC shouldn't be compared to gcc/icc/clang - it can't even compile code written for a 14 year old language specification (C99), so no sane person should use it for C development these days.
FWIW, Microsoft hasn't made an effort to support much of C99 because almost none of their users (Windows and XBox developers) use C. I don't know any Windows or XBox programmers who uses C.
Your point is still valid: if you want to compile C99 code, MSVC is not even an option.
"The surprising question we get is: 'How many people telecommute at Google?' ” [Google's CFO] Mr Pichette said at a talk in Sydney on Monday. "And our answer is: 'As few as possible'."
> Good chance for a savvy startup to pick up some remote talent the big boys can't.
No, this is a chance to pick up talent the big boys don't need. "As few as possible" telecommuters means they do hire telecommuters. Apply, see if your skills make up for your telecommuting. As a telecommuter, your application will need to be particularly strong to make up for what the company risks and loses by not having you in the office - if it isn't, a big company won't take the risk on you.
> No, this is a chance to pick up talent the big boys don't need
Considering how bad they are at hiring, there should be very competent people there.
> As a telecommuter, your application will need to be particularly strong to make up for what the company risks and loses by not having you in the office -
Which is, almost nothing, unless they are not set up for remote work, which every minimal competent company today is/should be.
> if it isn't, a big company won't take the risk on you.
Tell that to Red Hat. A big majority of their development positions (if not all) are remote.
> Considering how bad they are at hiring, there should be very competent people there.
The company under discussion at Google. They're great at hiring, at least by their metrics: they have thousands of the world's best engineers.
> Which is, almost nothing, unless they are not set up for remote work, which every minimal competent company today is/should be.
You're ignoring context again. Patrick Pichette, CFO of Google, said regarding the number of telecommuters: "as few as possible." In my response, I was addressing that comment by pointing out it implies the company is equipped to work with telecommuters but sees telecommuting as a disadvantage.
> Tell that to Red Hat. A big majority of their development positions (if not all) are remote.
Red Hat is a great example of a company whose unique business model lets them rely heavily on remote developers. It's unsurprising given the work they do: they take existing open-source software and package it, maintain it, and support it. This is work that can be largely done independently. They don't write OSes like the biggest software giants do - they keep the lights running for Linux, the FOSS community's shared OS.
Red Hat is an open-source utility company, and their margins (~10% - one of the lowest in software) reflect that. Few think there's room for many such large companies, given that Red Hat has only just hit $1b in revenue last year (woohoo!).
>The company under discussion at Google. They're great at hiring, at least by their metrics
Yes, I know about the context. "At least by their metrics" which can be good, but certainly not great. To be fair they have a never ending flood of candidates and have to deal with that.
But the main issue is that it only gets candidates with a very narrow set of skills.
"it implies the company is equipped to work with telecommuters but sees telecommuting as a disadvantage"
Not necessarily, it can be a one-off setup for the few telecommuters.
"It's unsurprising given the work they do: they take existing open-source software and package it, maintain it, and support it. This is work that can be largely done independently. They don't write OSes like the biggest software giants do - they keep the lights running for Linux, the FOSS community's shared OS."
You are underestimating heavily what Red Hat does. Especially the amount of development that goes there.
> This sort of attitude is precisely why the big boys don't stay the big boys in tech.
Are you saying telecommuters are the key to staying big in tech? To encourage innovation big companies want happy engineers in close proximity, talking spontaneously in varied, positive environments. Hence the free food. And the massages. And all the other perks.
