|
Members in Shoutbox
None.
Shoutbox Search
Shoutbox Commands
/w [name] > Whisper
/r > Reply to last whisper /me > Marks as action Shoutbox Information
Moderators may delete any and all shouts at will.
|
Global Shoutbox
Please log in to shout.
[2016-7-21. : 9:10 pm]  Moose -- How does OOP lead to using more statics and globals? You would think you would put fields into the classes where they belong.[2016-7-21. : 9:07 pm]  CecilSunkure -- Generally OOP lends to touching static or global data. These cause issues when trying to convert old legacy code to a newer multi-threaded environment[2016-7-21. : 9:05 pm]  Generalpie -- Dem0nDem0n shouted: Generalpie I think I'd prefer 2 1 3, but now that I think about it, I don't know if I'd like the start button to be all the way on the left monitor if it's not my main one The start button can be placed on all monitors or just one[2016-7-21. : 9:05 pm] CecilSunkure -- Two for linked list, the other was this morning I googled a random file system file to check for OOP[2016-7-21. : 9:04 pm] Dem0n -- GeneralpieGeneralpie shouted: For triple monitor setups, do you guys prefer a 1 2 3 configuration or a 2 1 3 configuration? I think I'd prefer 2 1 3, but now that I think about it, I don't know if I'd like the start button to be all the way on the left monitor if it's not my main one[2016-7-21. : 9:02 pm] Generalpie -- For triple monitor setups, do you guys prefer a 1 2 3 configuration or a 2 1 3 configuration?[2016-7-21. : 9:02 pm] Moose -- http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?ArgumentsAgainstOop oh man, goldmine for Cecil LMAO[2016-7-21. : 8:58 pm] Generalpie -- CecilSunkureCecilSunkure shouted: Then give them to DarkenedFantasies I have dark fantasies  [2016-7-21. : 8:54 pm] CecilSunkure -- I'd be all for it if jj wants to show like a demo OOP example. Then I could give comments or whatever and write up an alternative style if necessary[2016-7-21. : 8:54 pm] Moose -- Yeah, it was kind of a big one because you'd literally end up making an editor. That's why I suggested a .dat instead[2016-7-21. : 8:53 pm] CecilSunkure -- Oh I imagined CHK reading would take too long to get good examples up[2016-7-21. : 8:51 pm] jjf28 -- + the language is designed to run on every machine and has, by comparison, excellent file io libraries, sooo if this is a clear cut procedural win, I blame C++[2016-7-21. : 8:51 pm] Moose -- Like a unitsDatFile has a collection of unitsDatEntries which you have a bajillion getters and setters for. Then you make a nice GUI editor or some shit and then not have to worry about what byte 82 is and whether or not you put byte 14 where you meant to put byte 15. Then the modders are happy or whatever.[2016-7-21. : 8:46 pm] jjf28 -- serialization is a decent display of OOP in Java, but they have full-reflection and you can't really nitpick performance there  [2016-7-21. : 8:45 pm] Moose -- Stuff that actually has a structure that can possibly lend itself to OOP instead of something it's pretty obviously going to be inferior at >_>[2016-7-21. : 8:44 pm] CecilSunkure -- What do they say at the wedding? Speak now or forever hold your piece[2016-7-21. : 8:37 pm] Moose -- Personally, I don't even think serialization was a good problem for this anyway. [2016-7-21. : 8:36 pm] CecilSunkure -- I find it hard to come up with much beyond the pros I outlined in the topic already[2016-7-21. : 8:35 pm] CecilSunkure -- That's a classic over-engineering pattern that happens during the dogmatic application of OOP-like ideas[2016-7-21. : 8:35 pm] CecilSunkure -- The direct result of that was I implemented a parser that looks ahead into the text file, when I could have just known what types were coming a-priori[2016-7-21. : 8:34 pm] CecilSunkure -- During the OOP implementation I was led to constantly worry about un-needed API problems, or future use cases that just don't matter much, or how this may "scale" when more people use it. The last one, scaling, directly leads to people trying to write "generic" code[2016-7-21. : 8:34 pm] CecilSunkure -- No OOP, no unnecessary encapsulation, polymorphism, inheritance, no worries about "scalability" whatever the hell that means[2016-7-21. : 8:33 pm] CecilSunkure -- In the serializer I just straight up implemented a serializer and directly solved the problem at-hand[2016-7-21. : 8:32 pm] Moose -- Yeah, you keep saying that. Then we disagree. But you say whatever it was was just thinking. So really, stop it.[2016-7-21. : 8:31 pm] CecilSunkure -- If somehow code that is good arised from an OOP methodology, then it doesn't matter[2016-7-21. : 8:30 pm] Moose -- But yeah, the how OOP something is debate is dumb. If someone does something good with it, you just label it thinking. And then everyone disagrees. Shit, we can't even agree on what "generic" means, so how the hell are we ever going to get to OOP?[2016-7-21. : 8:27 pm] Moose -- Though we'd have a lot to agree on for overengineering. Wrote new implementations of some interfaces at work that ditch inheritance and fields that my group doesn't care about (like getting rid of the Math.BigDecimal backing that nobody uses when they only use the constructor that takes a double and the method that returns it) ... the profiler clocks it ~5-50x faster depending on what methods you're using.[2016-7-21. : 8:24 pm] Moose -- It's not less OOP because you implemented some concepts of OOP independently[2016-7-21. : 8:23 pm] Moose -- Yeah, but if it looks the same and works the same, does it really matter if OOP was implied intentionally to determine if it's OOP or not?[2016-7-21. : 8:21 pm] CecilSunkure -- The creator could have been applying a number of ideas, or just doing whatever made the most sense for the problem[2016-7-21. : 8:20 pm] CecilSunkure -- Also I will admit that if good code is written, that *looks* like it came from the engineer following an OOP-paradihm, it does not mean OOP was applied during creation[2016-7-21. : 8:16 pm] Moose -- TBH, I still think the thing Cecil hates is people writing shitty overengineered code, which often results from OOP, coincidentally or not. He even admitted it in the shoutbox, but went back to obfuscating his opinion in OOP-hate about ten minutes after that.[2016-7-21. : 8:15 pm] Moose -- VraelVrael shouted: C++ is so much more work VraelVrael shouted: no wonder cecil hates OOP Again, C++ is pretty bad at being an OOP language.[2016-7-21. : 6:31 pm] jjf28 -- VraelVrael shouted: though I gotta say, if we just standardized and formalized some class methods and names, added a bit to automatically cleanup dynamic memory, and threw that in a loop to dynamically type things at runtime things would be so much easi OH MY GOD I JUST DESCRIBED PYTHON AGAIN smart pointers!, but yea, more typing more learning curve[2016-7-21. : 6:30 pm] Sand Wraith -- remember that time a cop shot at a black therapist and an autistic guy and when asked why he shot, he replied "I don't know"? |
Members Online: Roy
Roy