Not my video, but absolutely fascinating videos. I've occasionally fallen into the YouTube hole of game-dev videos, and people with this level of presentation of their problem-solving and algorithm explanation is something I can not get enough.
Yup, from my understanding and experience IBM is by far the furthest and easiest to use. As in, I can throw up my python shell, write 20 lines of code, and that thing will run my circuit on a real quantum computer in the next 10 minutes.
I'm sorry, but my experience in work in many different segments shows the exact opposite to be true. Theres barely any company that takes "You can rise quickly thorough pay bands if you put in the effort", or "we would pay you more without benefits" seriously and is even being truthfully with you. I've had one company, the one where I'm at now, where I earn good money, get bonus and that bonus is determined by the companies performance. We had bonus when CEO etc. didnt get any because they messed up. We have great benefits (2 additional paid weeks of paternal leave, i.e.), but it's the exception to the rule.
I feel you. I write mostly Java code, but I've worked heavily with python + qiskit for quantum ML the past 3 months, and it's excellent. Qiskit is "low" level enough to give me the freedom I want, and with Jupyter Notebooks it's just so much easier to quickly construct something and evaluate, as well as extract it in a way I can put it in a paper.
C# and Java feels exactly the same to me now that Java has lambda/stream collection methods to match LINQ. Not sure how you feel there is any difference between the two. The only difficulty I have is when I have to work with Java Frameworks, even though I "never" use Java until I have to jump into a specific feature for other teams.
I never said there is a difference? I'm talking about Java <-> Python/qiskit/jupyter. Its a very different way of doing things, but just as enjoyable, and I'd say it's the currently best solution for any r&d and prototyping
I know a bit about them, and the target is completely different - PLCnext (and pretty much all of Phoenix Contact's product line) compete with current Siemens S7 generation, not LOGO. In practice, PLCnext is squarely in S7-1500 range and probably the bigger ones only.
That means heavy on Profinet usage, large powerful control units, considerable use of distributed I/O and multi-PLC operation, etc.
You dont use objects and methods in Logo - that goes literally against what it is. Its a FUP based programming device. I mean, it's been some time since I last held one, but I'd be _very_ surprised if you could "code" on it. The whole idea of it, is that you also can create programs on it using its on screen display
You can program it in simatic manager- which can convert other languages (KOP, AWL (Assembly-equivalent if i recall)) into FUP.
Which promotes using it for larger scale projects.
Which will not have objects. Not have functions.
Just kilometres of ladder logic, by the time the disaster management crew is called.
Arduino is definitely not cheaper. I've installed and programmed several LOGOs, and it's easy as hell. It's a compact package that already contains, in itself, enough inputs and output that can be used by i.e. electricians. An Arduino requires you to take the soldering iron into the hand.
I made myself the work and created a very basic ClosedFeedbackLoop Example for java, for anyone that might want to try it out. It's old and has terrible documentation, but I also haven't touched it in quite some time. Either way, here it is:
I love the idea behind this, and it seems like the right way. The strongest point seems to be that anything written with this can be directly verified - if I think that a table might have miscalculations, I can just go check it.
Do you have any plan of introducing templates? For example many Universities have templates with required formatting in latex/.docx, and being able to atleast have something like these would help a lot
yes, version control is baked in so once you save a version of an article or notebook the blocks are immediately reference-able, so if you use that table in your paper, its still linked to the same block/cell in the notebook and has a unique hash allowing referencing / lookup via our API and its easy to save new versions.
We are introducing templates for sure. Word is on our roadmap but first up is to introduce LaTeX templates including user defined ones. We started mapping out the initial UI and we've got some ideas for how to allow public and community generated templates to be added to the system too, we went through these in a recent meetup, it's recorded so you can see more here => https://youtu.be/r46wN4KWPac?t=1024
