Still love the feeling of having an idea for a feature at 10am on a Tuesday morning and having it shipped and live on production by noon. Gotta love Django.
The more I learn about Korean grammar, the more I'm convinced that English grammar makes no sense and is way less elegant.
Korean adjectives (형용사) behave quite similarly to as verbs (동사), so much so the term 용언 refers to both (= 형영사 + 동사 + copula), and sometimes people use the term "descriptive verb" instead.
And then there's a different part of speech called 관형사 for noun-modifiers ("adnouns") that actually goes before the noun. 형용사 can be conjugated into 관형사, but so can 동사 (analogous to "running" in "the running car", say).
I wonder if I should just ditch the English words and use the correct Korean terms instead. I don't think the English terms are used consistently between different textbooks.
I think the top idea in my head now is Korean, despite the fact I barely get any practice and haven't improved much.
One thing that's always surprised me about things like contest math or chess or StarCraft is how people can express a personality through their play style. For something formalizable with a clearly definede objective function, it's still not clear to me a priori that should happen.
Maybe that's a symptom of depth to look for in domains --- whether it naturally lets people express unique personalities.