A lot of people are sometimes shocked to hear that I only speak one language fluently.

It's true, and it's a product of growing up in an English-speaking family in an English-speaking country.

But I think about it for a bit, and I find it funny that although I only speak English fluently, there are certain words or phrases in other languages that I do understand, but don't necessarily remember when/where I learned them. I've just been hearing them from young.

Just note that the spellings I use here, are probably grossly wrong. Remember, I only speak, read and write English! So I just sound it out when I write...

For example, if says they want to jalan jalan, I'll know they'll want to go for a walk. Or if someone tedo already, then I'll know they've already gone to sleep.

If someone says they want to 吃 (in Hokkien dialect), I'll know they want to eat.

Other words such as lobang, etc also have some kind of connotation in my mind, although maybe I couldn't use it in a sentence or translate it directly for you. Or was that even the word? I don't know it, but I understand it conceptually every time I hear it mixed with an English sentence.

Certain words I understand but don't always think of an English translation off-hand. Like, "don't anyhow hantam ah!"

Same with, "ai ya, siang siang" or "ai yo, so turok leh"

And of course there's always "eat until gelak" or "wah, this soup so kyam!"

And there's always things like kecil or besar that I've also come to associate with describing how small or big someone is - and I always know it in reference to either me, or other kids around me. From my childhood.

But here's the thing! It's so useless! If you spoke to me completely in Bahasa Melayu, I'd be lost.

When I think about it, I find it pretty funny. And I can almost see that I had the potential to speak to languages growing up. I just didn't.

If only I spent more time with the older Nyonya aunties at church, maybe I'd be able to speak 1.5 languages haha!

There was an occasion once a while back where in talking with friends without technical background that the concept of imaginary numbers came up. I don't remember the context of it, but I remember that in commenting about the usefulness of imaginary numbers, I mentioned something to the effect that, "they make the world go round."

A lot of times when people question the usefulness of engineering, I put forth the consideration that practically everything around them is engineered. Sure it is easy to point out obvious products of engineering such as planes, cars, space shuttles, etc. But if you stop to think a little bit more, you'll realize that the shirt you're wearing was manufactured in a facility that had machinery to produce the fabrics, perform silk-screening, etc. The jewelery you are wearing is made of precious metals that had to be mined using engineering know-how for both tools and safe tunneling. The sandwich that you ate for lunch had bread that was produced in a bakery that used an oven that was specially designed to bake your bread in a semi-efficient manner. The list goes on.

In modern society, practically every industry hinges on or makes use of engineered solutions.

The very fact that you are capable of reading my post right now is thanks to the efforts of countless electrical, civil, mechanical, computer, environmental, chemical and systems engineers. (No the internet wasn't just built by comp-sci people - think of the infrastructure).

Yet amongst all of this engineered "stuff," I was humbly brought to Palm Sunday. I attended Elevation this past Sunday, and for the worship service, they had kids pass out palm branches. As I sat holding the palm branch, I store at it for a bit. And suddenly appreciated the beauty of this simple plant. I was holding something that wasn't engineered. Sure the bio-engineer and chemical engineer might argue that we now have the ability to breed plants, modify their genetics, etc. But that's exactly what it is - modifying.

We cannot create nature or life. And despite all of our advanced engineering know how, we would still die if we were not already provided with the things we need to live. If we had no water, could the chemical engineer synthesize enough H₂O for the planet to survive? But what if the chemical engineer didn't have 2 H's and an O? Could the physicist put enough electrons, neutrons and protons together to make enough H's and O's for the chemist?

Similarly, could the civil engineer build a bridge if not already given concrete for compression and steel rods for tension? Could the concrete and steel be made without the raw materials found within the earth?

Could the electrical engineer connect your phone call through a cellular network without the electromagnetic spectrum?

Everything is built upon the life already given to us using the creativity already given to us.

And so I appreciated the plant for what it is. A product of something that I could not engineer.

Then the Lord answered Job out of the storm. He said:

"Who is this that darkens my counsel
     with words without knowledge?
Brace yourself like a man;
     I will question you,
     and you shall answer me.

"Where were you when I laid the earth's foundation?
     Tell me, if you understand.
Who marked off its dimension? Surely, you know
     Who stretched a measuring line across it?
On what were its footings set,
     or who laid its cornerstone -
while the morning stars sang together
     and all the angels shouted for joy?

"Who shut up the sea behind the doors
     when it burst forth from the womb,
when I made the clouds its garment
     and wrapped it in the thick darkness,
when I fixed limits for it
     and set its doors and bars in place,
when I said, 'This far you may come and no farther;
     here is where your proud waves halt'?

...

"What is the way to the abode of light?
     And where does darkness reside?
Can you take them to their places?
     Do you know the paths to their dwellings?
Surely you know, for you were already born!
     You have lived so many years!"

...

The Job replied to the Lord:

"I know that you can do all things;
     no plan of yours can be thwarted.
You asked, 'Who is this that obscures my counsel without knowledge?'
     Surely I spoke of things I did not understand,
     things too wonderful for me to know.

"You said, 'Listen now, and I will speak;
     I will question you
     and you shall answer me.'
My ears have heard of you
     but now my eyes have seen you.
Therefore I despise myself
     and repent in dust and ashes."

Friday night was my last official UWCCF sharing night. In addition, being the Winter term, the next year's committee was announced and commissioned.

When watching the new committee gather in the centre of the room as we prayed for them, one new difference struck me. All of the new committee members were younger than me. Some of them, I remember as frosh. I've always been used to seeing committee as being first older than me, then my age.

It was a really neat thing, when I thought about it. This is the new generation.

By no means exceptional. But by all means indicative that we are reaching the end.

I'm becoming super irritable these days. But we're nearly there.

In computing, marking a variable as volatile indicates to the compiler that it should not assume that the state of the variable follows the conventionally assumed scope it appears in. It is subject to change without notice regardless of scope.

In my experience so far, an example of this might be when you are developing in C at a lower level. For example, if your program has an interrupt service routine (ISR) that handles external interrupts, this routine might need to update the states of variables in the main program. So you should declare these variables as volatile, because they may be modified outside the conventional scope of the program. I.e. the ISR may run at any time and update variables in your main program regardless of the fact that in conventional sequential programs, the state of those variables should be preserved by scope.

But you cannot know for sure what the ISR may end up doing to the main program.

The effects of the changing a variable outside of scope cannot be predicted. Thus you must declare those variables as volatile so that the compiler doesn't make assumptions about the scope of those variables in its optimizations.

Today felt like a volatile day. Certain things affected me that probably shouldn't have. But you know that the ISR means well. And the programmer should ensure that the main routine gives the ISR a benefit of a doubt.