4 ms·
Your tone of the comment is turning people off, but essentially you are right. I only read the "Concord" gem part. I would consider this as an unnecessary abstr
by jsnk 10y ago
Your tone of the comment is turning people off, but essentially you are right. I only read the "Concord" gem part. I would consider this as an unnecessary abstraction that only obscures the code more. I wish people would strive to write more dumb and straight forward code more. This is especially true if you are writing code in a team setting.
- catnaroek 10y agoI wouldn't call it “abstraction”, a term that I reserve for things that hide their implementation details well. (Litmus test: if you use the abstraction wrong, will the error message show you any implementation details?) Rather, it's boilerplate generation - basically a dynamic counterpart to Lisp macros. Also, I see nothing wrong with the tone of the comment.
- lispm 10y agoThe direct counterpart is programming on the Common Lisp Object System meta-object level: different meta-classes, funcallable objects, etc.