pepper

dshadle wrote:

For sake of argument, I will assume that your comment is based on an interest to join our team and are afraid that not being internal hurts those chances. This is not the case and I will look forward to seeing your resume as we can always use more people to help us respond to random comments.

I'm afraid I would fall short in the area of obsessive study of Microsoft^® Teams and Product lines. I prefer a much more balanced approach and would end up asking much more pointed questions that would actually have the curious side effect of improving your products.

I don't see that as being the initiative behind these videos.

I'd like to see Rory defend this one. Yet another INTERNAL employee is hired onto the Channel 9 team.

So the pattern continues...

I listened to the audio version of this video...maybe that was a mistake.

It is interesting to see what they consider "safe" and "unsafe", but wouldn't the scope and type of a variable inherently limit the extent of its "side effects"? And the same with functions? Perhaps a better definition of "safe" is in order.

I should note I have never programmed in Haskell, but it looks intriguing.