|
NihilCredo posted:I have used this pattern and I would just avoid repeating the base class words from the subclass name. So its full name would be FooResult.NotFound, much like an enum in fact. I think it's nicer when the static property is the thing that gets the proper enum name and the class name has some suffix. Of course you could omit the static property on the base class and just do something like FooResult.NotFound.Instance or new FooResult.NotFound() in the place where you produce values, but I think that detracts more from the enumness of it. Ideally both the type and the property would be called NotFound, but that isn't allowed. Also yeah, you are of course right in saying there's no need to repeat the entity name in the subclass names when they're nested inside the base class.
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2021 20:42
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 15:45 |
|
|
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2021 02:19
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/Jonathan_Blow/status/1363912045335248896 
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2021 19:11
|
|
|
If they ever do release a compiler I can't wait to see it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2021 19:16
|
|
|
the last guy we hired implemented a garbage collector and it deleted our entire codebase, we won't make that mistake again
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2021 19:41
|
|
|
Hammerite posted:the last guy we hired implemented a garbage collector and it deleted our entire codebase, we won't make that mistake again which mistake, implementing a garbage collector or having a codebase?
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2021 19:44
|
|
|
Props to whoever in our organization purchased critical software, set it up so the entire company runs on it and any malfunction is a Very Bad Time, and then lost all the documentation while the original developer went out of business decades ago. Perfect storm to create a coding horror of my own - under normal circumstances, to automate database input, you could just... Send the data directly. That would be normal. That also wouldn't be supported here. So I have to set up a pile of script to input hundreds to thousands of items (thankfully not in that large of batches) by emulating automatic key input for a VT100 terminal at the fastest rate the virtual machine can support while still compensating for lag between offsite servers and onsite terminals. Without ever having done programming beyond "hello world" in Lua back in the mid 00s. Coding horrors yet to come as I unpack this nightmare.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2021 20:15
|
|
|
SkyeAuroline posted:Props to whoever in our organization purchased critical software, set it up so the entire company runs on it and any malfunction is a Very Bad Time, and then lost all the documentation while the original developer went out of business decades ago. Perfect storm to create a coding horror of my own - under normal circumstances, to automate database input, you could just... Send the data directly. That would be normal. That also wouldn't be supported here. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2021 20:35
|
|
|
after squirming with what rustaceans presume all C coders are like, this guy nails a niche and makes me more queasy than they ever could
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2021 20:47
|
|
|
Genuinely, this is what I'm doing at this point. And this software does inexplicable poo poo. Thanks, "forced to use a fork of Visual Basic". I have the same code block running in four different locations, that runs in sequence. TextRead = Session.ScreenText(x, y, 1, 30) SlashIndex = InStr(1, TextRead, "/", 1) ZRead = Left(TextRead, SlashIndex) ZWrite = ZRead & DataEntered(1) The actual variable names are tied to the software but none of them overlap. X and Y changes with starting coordinates on the terminal screen, Z changes with field name, array name changes with which array it needs to pull from, 1 is a placeholder until I get writing fixed before I set up array cycling. (I'm still not formally trained in programming. I at least have my code commented so it's legible to someone other than me.) Exactly the same SKU should run exactly the same way every time, right? Wrong - one of the four instances fails every time for no visible reason. Because gently caress me I guess. And yes, the code could theoretically be condensed and have several of those expressions run in-line... except it throws an error and halts if I do. It stopped throwing errors if I gave them their own variables. It threw errors on examples copied directly from the language reference book's examples. I haven't quite given up to the point of asking for help again yet. But Christ every time I fix something two more headaches open up. 80s software was a mistake. SkyeAuroline fucked around with this message at 21:27 on Feb 22, 2021 |
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2021 20:56
|
|
|
Wow, just think, right now I could be writing a compiler for an unsatisfiable rear end in a top hat hellboss with what I assume would be a game-programmer salary and working conditions.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2021 21:14
|
|
|
Only you can save mankind (from THE VICIOUS FEEDBACK LOOP OF BAD SOFTWARE)
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2021 21:32
|
|
|
Hammerite posted:the last guy we hired implemented a garbage collector and it deleted our entire codebase, we won't make that mistake again Sounds like he did a good job though?
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2021 04:37
|
|
|
rjmccall posted:Wow, just think, right now I could be writing a compiler for an unsatisfiable rear end in a top hat hellboss with what I assume would be a game-programmer salary and working conditions. But have you considered that it will be a really simple task because so much of the stuff in other compilers is wrong or unnecessary?
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2021 09:31
|
|
|
Its always a red flag to pretend "knowing more about the subject" is a bad thing. You can always find the rare archeologist that believe the world is 6000 years old and the bible is literal. If you have weird ideas, you can always find somebody with these bad ideas, no reason to look expertise outside the area where the expertise exists. I know I know... Johnatahn Blow whole gimmick is raising red flags, but still. This one was so "in the face" that looked kind of staged, like making fun of himself.
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2021 12:54
|
|
|
He sounds... unmedicated. I really hope he at least checks with a therapist or something.
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2021 13:32
|
|
|
The weirdest thing about it is his "if you have worked in these areas but see that much is done wrong..." without explaining what it is that he thinks is "done wrong". Whatever it is he thinks is done wrong, he thinks it's sufficiently obvious that there's no risk of miscommunication if he fails to explain... even though what he's dismissing is the conventional thinking on the matter, or some aspect of it. If I'm someone who also has unconventional ideas about how compilers should be written or whatever, how does he know that I have the right unconventional ideas, and not the wrong ones? What if I show up and start working for him and I implement a compiler that does everything weirdly, but not the weird way that he imagines would be good? He can hardly complain that he explained what he wanted. All he's said is that he wants someone who agrees that the conventional wisdom is bad, somehow. Not why or in what way you should think it's bad. it's like if I advertised a job for a doctor and said, "if you see that much in medicine is done wrong then you're a good fit for the job", and got mad with the guy who applies and wants to treat cancer with vitamin supplements when clearly what I meant was that we should go all in on crystal healing.
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2021 13:58
|
|
|
Presumably there'd be a job interview where he checks that your crazy ideas about compilers are the same as his crazy ideas about compilers
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2021 14:00
|
|
|
Jonathan Blow is a cautionary tale about addiction to outside-the-box thinking. "Hey, everyone is doing something wrong" isn't inherently bad, the trouble is when your baseline assumption shifts to "Everyone is doing everything wrong". Especially if you've been proven correct before, or had success going against the grain, there's a death spiral there. Even in the vague description of his language, it's contradictory and largely based on the principle of "it all makes sense when you learn it" - entirely separate from its own general philosophy of low-friction (defined so nebulously as to mean 'what makes sense to Blow himself').
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2021 15:13
|
|
|
Well to be fair programmers have been doing everything wrong for like 80 years. That's like the one time when you're right about everyone being wrong.
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2021 15:24
|
|
|
xtal posted:Well to be fair programmers have been doing everything wrong for like 80 years. That's like the one time when you're right about everyone being wrong. As a discipline, it's gone from carrying poo poo, to dragging poo poo with ropes, to dragging poo poo on sleds, and maybe even putting wheels on those sleds. Some lunatic might come along and suggest more wheels, but Jonathan Blow likes doing the equivalent of going "those circle fucks at the academy are all brainwashed! ovals are the ideal shape!"
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2021 16:26
|
|
|
Is there some concrete output blow presupposes he can get by ignoring common practice? Like is there one weird compiler optimization that's hard to do in standard abstractions that his is supposed to make easy? Or is it literally just bike shedding over implementation details that don't have any bearing on the end result (other than getting things hilariously wrong because you reinvent everyone's old bugs when you resolve everyone's old problems)
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2021 18:36
|
|
|
leper khan posted:Is there some concrete output blow presupposes he can get by ignoring common practice? Like is there one weird compiler optimization that's hard to do in standard abstractions that his is supposed to make easy? quote:jai is an exciting new programming language being developed by Jonathan Blow (Wikipedia, Twitter). The stated aim of the language is to be a better language for programming games than C++, but the language really is a general alternative to C++ with the following goals: The primer has a lot of concerns-mixing, like you can run any function at compile-time, there's no GC so you're able to "optimize" memory.
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2021 18:47
|
|
|
quote:
Boy oh boy, is that a huge red flag to me.
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2021 18:51
|
|
|
As far as I can tell JBlow's views on compiler design are basically libertarianism. He wants to "deregulate" programming to keep Big Compiler's hands out of your code and allow geniuses to operate without the unnecessary constraints that keep inferior programmers from hurting themselves.
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2021 18:55
|
|
|
Just write assembly, blow.
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2021 18:59
|
|
|
This reminds me, has anyone heard of Zed Shaw lately?
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2021 19:03
|
|
|
he went spoiling for a fight and got wrecked by a furry, had he done anything since then?
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2021 19:07
|
|
|
JawnV6 posted:he went spoiling for a fight and got wrecked by a furry, had he done anything since then? That's the last I read too.
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2021 19:32
|
|
|
JawnV6 posted:he went spoiling for a fight and got wrecked by a furry, had he done anything since then? Had to google for this. Found the furry's article, and then some sites with "hacker" in the name full of people defending him, some complaining that the description "toxic" is a red flag that "makes me sick." Guy sounds like a winner, and I also forget sometimes how much less awful it is here than other places. Blue Footed Booby fucked around with this message at 20:37 on Feb 23, 2021 |
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2021 20:33
|
|
|
JawnV6 posted:designed for good programmers Welp, guess that's my cue to go
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2021 21:07
|
|
|
Blue Footed Booby posted:Had to google for this. Found the furry's article, and then some sites with "hacker" in the name full of people defending him, some complaining that the description "toxic" is a red flag that "makes me sick." Guy sounds like a winner, and I also forget sometimes how much less awful it is here than other places. I also found the blog article but also this Shaw guy has a poorly written Wikipedia page which is extremely obviously just an advert for him and his books, lol
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2021 21:09
|
|
|
pokeyman posted:That's the last I read too. Lol that was like 2 weeks ago, I didn't even know about that
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2021 21:21
|
|
|
xtal posted:Lol that was like 2 weeks ago, I didn't even know about that What is time
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2021 21:26
|
|
|
Actually though I had no idea it was so recent. Combination of time losing meaning and assuming I wasn't necessarily reading a recent post.
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2021 21:27
|
|
|
The saga continues. Item numbers generated with a random number generator. Nobody wrote in duplicate protection that doesn't require user interaction to work correctly. You can see the problem. It's been running this way since the 90s.
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2021 22:44
|
|
|
Locally unique identifier.
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2021 22:55
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/jorendorff/status/1362819000850386949?s=19
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2021 23:03
|
|
|
look at this loving garbage, this is from a full rebuild after doing a "clean solution". vs how are you so bad at this.
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2021 23:34
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 15:45 |
|
|
do you have any dotfuscator/etc dependencies or libraries?
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2021 23:40
|
|