When dealing with base 10 representations, multiplying by 10 is a simple matter of adding zeroes;
dividing numbers that end with a zero by two is (usually) an afterthought;
doing both operations in that sequence is (usually) equally trivial, the only effortful thing I have to do is adding or subtracting a multiplicand, once or twice or thrice.
It's not easier than having the result imprinted in my memory, but it cuts away ~ three quarters of the table.
Nope, went through "(6 × 5) + 6". Slightly slower, but much more flexible since you can do that with any (base 10 representation of a) number that has a reasonable number of digits.
Concepts are already here - (as of now) they fix a subset of this, and errors messages can still be extremely long.
They're less like "here's every single template parameter of the involved types" and more like "this template thingy has many specializations with different constraints, here's a list of all of them and why none of them are satisfied with your parameters"
Not evil by itself, but if you want to obfuscate C++20 code you can get REALLY creative...
Somewhat in between, more towards the former I guess?
I wouldn't say it's nonsense nor that it should be made fun of, I simply disagree on calling it a "choice". It's more like a D&D saving throw, and sometimes the DM just makes it mathematically impossible for you to pass it, but I concede that "choice" is less verbose than that.
I agree that you can change your psychological reaction to everything, and that it's not easy, but it's not, like, an API call to a well documented open-source library, and you don't necessarily have full control over what that change is.
The other interpretation is basically your opinion, but actively dismissing the fact that it's ~~never~~ not always effortless or painless - I've heard that here and there, by people I'm not really fond of.
You should elaborate a bit, I can get two possible interpretations of this - one which I agree should be a more popular opinion, and one which I believe is nonsense and should be made fun of.
Who wouldn't pity those who make do with a lossy compression image format?
Were you really wrong, though?
But what if the depicted person's sleep schedule was a person?
There's a joke about sewers and slides somewhere in there
Think of the relationship between "optimism", "pessimism" and "realism":
generally, those words are respectively interpreted as "focusing on the good things", "focusing on the bad things" and "ignoring (or trying to ignore) personal biases on the topic at hand".
In a way that makes sense, the universe defines our perception on things, not the other way around.
However, let's suppose you just had a reality check, at least as my terminally online ass knows the term as.
That means something happened to you, that forced you to realize something about yourself - be it your body, your psyche, your knowledge about anything.
A realization so undeniable, that, despite your lizard brain's psychological self-defense mechanisms' censorship attempts, made you realize you've been wrong about something.
The reality check brings your mood down in the short term, and possibly pushes you to improve yourself (or, alternatively, to [concoct a workaround to the tyrannical laws of the universe]) in the long run, but... that's not truly neutral, is it?
It may be a "bad" feeling possibly followed by a good outcome (see: cognitive dissonance), but it is never a GOOD feeling followed by a possibly bad outcome. The latter case is a confimation bias, if anything - the opposite of a reality check.
Going back to the first paragraph: if someone says "I'm not a pessimist, I'm a realist" you may conflate that person for an pessimist, but not an optimist.
___
Superman's kryptonite is still unkown, unfortunately.
Scientists have speculated that understanding the physiology of Subman (Superman's greatest threat) may help us find it, but so far polite requests for non-invasive experiments have been declined and we cannot, in good conscience, forcefully subject him to them.