SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
The Fine print: The following are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Journal by turgid
Which LISP should I learn? Years ago I read about Scheme and wrote some hello world level code. I learned about lambda functions and currying. I also looked at racket. A few years ago, much of my day job involved the JVM and I was getting sick of Java so I got a book on Clojure, which is a very nice language, but I never wrote any.
A few days ago I downloaded and built the latest version of DrRacket.
Should I go straight to Haskell? Or what about other functional languages? Is Erlang worth a look?
I need something stimulating to distract my brain from the mundane nature of everyday life, and mediocre programming languages.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Hand me a pair of leather pants and a CASIO keyboard -- I'm living for today!
(Score: 3, Funny) by DannyB on Thursday December 02 2021, @10:33PM (4 children)
Well here is a first, for me anyway.
IRS Pub 1220 (Rev. 10-2021). Available here:
https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/p1220.pdf [irs.gov]
There is an error!
ERROR on IRS Pub 1220 (Rev. 10-2021)
Page 113 of PDF
Record B, Form 1099-NEC
Positions 548-722 Blank 173 length
WRONG: the length is 175 not 173!
It pays to be a geek and pay attention to detail.
Young people won't believe you if you say you used to get Netflix by US Postal Mail.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday December 03 2021, @05:18AM (3 children)
They make errors in the length calculation all the time. The specification says, or at least used to say, that the "length" column is "advisory" and that you should only rely on the position. However looking at this year's with my experience in the past, I vaguely remember there being a different layout in that same area with more length 1 records. Perhaps they changed them all to blanks this year or in the past and just copy-pasted the 173 instead of adding the two 1s as well. Perhaps you could check the IRS's test files to see what they do.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by DannyB on Monday December 06 2021, @03:40PM (2 children)
If you go with 173 instead of 175 then your total record length is 748 instead of 750, and all your other field positions are wrong. If you assume that it is length which is wrong, then all other field positions line up, record length if 750 and everything else fits correctly. So the preponderance of the evidence is that there is a single small mistake, instead of all other field positions and the record length being wrong for the "B" record.
Young people won't believe you if you say you used to get Netflix by US Postal Mail.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 06 2021, @10:22PM (1 child)
Maybe I am misreading you, but where did I suggest the alternative?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 06 2021, @11:36PM
I think I got it. That last sentence is missing its introductory phrase of "if you really cared" that I could have sworn I added.