I (and my siblings) had a total of 6 hamsters. 4 died of old age, 1 suddenly bled out overnight, and 1 died pretty young, but nothing was obviously wrong, so I dunno.

My neighbors had more than a dozen rodents (including 5 guinea pigs). They all died horrifically, including 4 that were killed by mouse traps. Because of course you should have mouse traps, and also keep small rodents that you allow to escape constantly. As an adult, I think the parents were seriously negligent in teaching their children, and then also negligent in buying more rodents for the grinder after the first two or three met horrible fates.

I get a similar vibe from psychology. There’s a number of “experts” that are out in the field, doing the hard work day after day, putting in those hours… And hopelessly blinded by their own confirmation bias and survivorship bias. Clinical therapists in surveys prove very willing to overlook strong research in support of certain methods because they believe they see results in their clinical work that can’t be reproduced in a lab.

Then each field also has a research wing, slowly carving a path towards useful ideas, expending tremendous effort for each new finding, method, and result (even negative results!).

That’s something else stealing the name. As you can see, the wikipedia page doesn’t even mention support for unitless metrics as variable types.

In case you don’t know, C is the successor to B (which used imperial variables). There was a planned successor to C called D, which would use all unitless quantities, like they do in Fermi approximations, but it turns out those aren’t very good. That’s why we have C++ (which supports metric and imperial) instead.

If it’s all if statements and if it uses well nested logic and if it’s written in a modern language and if the number of if statements doesn’t exceed 57, it could be good. Otherwise it is overly verbose. Otherwise it is dated. Otherwise it is spaghetti code. Otherwise it should go to the regular code check routine function.