>>634258
> it was a constant evolution with contributions by many people over time
still I'm not sure you can do as much as Dennis Ritchie or Fabrice Bellard
> meaning getting into a domain to become somewhat of an expert in it is not that time intensive
dunno, for me getting into something completely new like markup, marketing or circuit design is a huge stress
I'm only relatively comfy near the area I already know something
> much much more desirable to managers looking for talent
I have an impression that JavaScript, Golang, C++ and embedded programmers are all have very similar cost on the market (relative to the experience of course)
or maybe JS programmers are more valuable even though JS is thousands of times simpler than embedded in my opinion
> especially if it's skill that are unusual in a field
there're not so many jobs of that type though, and chances are they usually want someone really smart (read: PhD in that area), not a curious person who studied it as a hobby
> it's just an efficient way to increase your worth
how do you know that skills should you learn though? what if you gained skills A, B and C, but they actually need C, D and E