They're being tactful. It's clearly a reference to Waiting for Godot. They even said so.
The name "Godot" was chosen in reference to Samuel Beckett's play Waiting for Godot, as it represents the never-ending wish of adding new features in the engine, which would get it closer to an exhaustive product, but never will.
Ok so if I'm understanding correctly Hyperlight lets you sandbox components of your embedded system using hypervisor/VMs. Hyperlight WASM is an alternative sandbox that uses WASM for sandboxing instead.
I guess if you only have WASM there would not be much need for Hyperlight at all, but if you have a mix of WASM and non-WASM code this would be useful.
Honestly I think the complaints about the job market are overblown. If you are good then there will always be a job for you somewhere.
If you've already tried programming and you enjoy it then it is a really great career. Crazy money (especially in the US) for low effort and low responsibility.
Just be aware that CS is usually a lot more theoretical than most programming. You'll be learning about things like Hoare logic and category theory. Tons of stuff you only really need in the real world if you're doing formal verification or compiler design.
Still, I kind of wish I did have that theoretical background now I am doing formal verification and compiler design! (I did a mechanical engineering degree.)
Also you don't need a CS degree to get a programming job. I did a survey of colleagues once to see what degree they had and while CS was the most common, fewer than half had one. Most had some kind of technical degree (maths, physics, etc.), but some had done humanities and one guy (who was very good!) didn't have a degree at all.
I wouldn't worry about the market. Maybe take a look at the syllabus for places you might apply to, e.g. here's the one for Cambridge. Also I guess an important question is what's the alternative? What would you do otherwise?
mainly because of rails magic though whenever I look at it. Convention over configuration hurts my brain some days.
I agree. Ruby has waaaay too much magic which makes it impossible to follow (dynamic typing makes it even worse).
And convention over configuration definitely has huge advantages in terms of consistency and terseness, but it is also way less discoverable because instead of a config file say "the stuff is in foo" you have to already know that everything in foo is automatically treated as stuff.
I often wonder if it would be crazy to have both: you have a configuration file that says where things go, but the values must be set to constant well-known values. Sounds kind of crazy so I've never done it but you would get consistency and discoverability. I expect people would complain about the redundancy though.
None of this is nonsensical though.
You could easily have something like that about e.g. mountain biking:
NEW PRODUCT - Sram Xg-1299 Eagle 10-52 Cassette
Ha no. SQLite can easily handle tens of GB of data. It's not even going to notice a few thousand text files.
The initial import process can be sped up using transactions but as it's a one-time thing and you have such a small dataset it probably doesn't matter.