It seems like the author thought stack traces are underrated because people don’t like exceptions and don’t always throw. It seems like they don’t understand why people don’t like exceptions, and think that stack traces should be there for every case where the author thinks should be an exception, and ties the desire to avoid exceptions to some strawman use case — a nice looking output — and called it “modern error handling”.

Error / exception handling is separate from stack traces. You don’t need to have an exception to have a stack trace, and stack traces aren’t just used for exceptions.

They also seem to not understand why people make do without stack traces in a microservice architecture. That’s simply not true. First off, you can still get stack traces of individual services. And secondly, if you build your services to accept, eg, something like a tracing ID, and print it along your logs, you essentially have a stack traces across services. In a web service, you can track the work done by all your systems for a single request from the client.

Now, onto why exceptions are somewhat disliked. Let’s just get the simple stuff out of the way: they’re generally bad for performance; they’re invisible to the method caller until they run into the problem, meaning you can’t ever ship updates that you’re confident won’t fall over disgracefully; try-catch hell, etc.

For a slightly more philosophical answer, why aren’t your exceptions just cases you need to handle? The try-catch pattern essentially builds up a separate channel of logic where your program needs to operate in but is expressed or recorded in very fragmented ways, forcing devs to have to pop open every function to look at why something is thrown, and hope that somewhere down the stack, no new exceptions are being thrown and not handled. The logic behind exceptions becomes second-class citizens that programmers can easily forget, instead of being front and centre. Can’t divide by 0? Tell me instead of setting me on a separate handling path. Why should I try-catch every single method call, or even property access? Don’t wait for the user to hit the call and just tell me that something is supposed to be impossible, or if I should handle the case where it doesn’t hold any values, right as I compile (dynamic languages can’t really do that).

This was pointed out in another comment but I will basically echo it to just give that call a boost: Point your instructor to well-regarded sources for introversion and extroversion, and let them know that the labelling in their note is not only inaccurate, it falsely attaches a wrongly defined word onto problematic behaviours that have nothing to do with what introversion and extroversion is, which is not good because it propagates a false narrative.

If your instructor doesn’t seem cooperative and insists on being correct, talk to other instructors that you trust, or even go to those with more authority to tell them about the issue. If you can’t get anyone to actually do something, I suggest you change schools immediately, and call the school out for what they did.

Maybe it’s just one of those days, but I have no tolerance for this sort of false narrative being spread, even if the original intention is innocuous, and especially in a school. Being forced to act in a certain way that deviates from one’s personality to not be perceived as a problematic person, especially over a badly-informed opinion, can have lasting negative consequences to children and adolescents. I’m tired of seeing introverted friends and family members suffer over the fact that they’re introverts, to the point where they will deny being an introvert and even echo these sorts of statements in order to blend in.

I wish there’s some kind of follow up to news like this.

Did the police report go anywhere? Or is it just sitting in some paper pile, or trashed? Follow it up, or call it out.

DoFo looks for what gets him votes and does the thing. I’ve, thus far, seen no other principles behind this man, maybe except for his obsession with Toronto. Of course he’ll play Captain Canada cause why would you not play that to get people to think they can rely on you? He targeted bike lanes because Ontario is car-centric and most people are forced to be motorists, who are generally inconvenienced by bike lanes in the short term, and it’ll get him the support he wants. He struck down education workers’ rights to strike, because families are inconvenienced, and there are a lot more families than there are education workers. 200 bucks rebate with no regards to the cost of actually sending out that money, just because it’ll most probably get him the support he wants.

And lemme guess what we’ll hear in the next couple of weeks or months:

“I’ve made the best deals with Canada and Mexico. They’ve been rude and uncooperative in helping us secure the borders, but now look, they had to.”

And then there’d be the the suckers and ass-kissers:

“Fentanyl’s not a thing anymore in the USA because of Trump.” (says a person who lives in a neighbourhood never affected by fentanyl abuse)

“President Trump has made our country more secure than ever, preventing illegal immigrants and drugs coming in from Canada and Mexico, while making them pay for it.” (vixen news or something)

“Illegal immigration was at an all time low under President Trump.” (says a person who’s never looked at the stats)

Given what was actually realized, Trump did not have to play coy and use tariffs as threats, and it would’ve been a rather easy call to ask for what he wanted. He’s essentially sent US allies on a wild episode to essentially bully them to show off his regained powers.

Oh, and of course he only “pauses” the damn thing. He could re-use it after all. Classic bully behaviour.

If you need anything that complex and that it’s critical for, say, customers, or people doing things directly for customers, you probably shouldn’t use bash. Anything that needs to grow? Definitely not bash. I’m not saying bash is what you should use if you want it to grow into, say, a web server, but that it’s good enough for small tasks that you don’t expect to grow in complexity.