5 ms·

You might not need if statements: a better approach to branching logic

4 points by bubble_boi 10y ago

geophile 10y ago
Jesus H. Christ, what an irritating writer.
Cozumel 10y ago
That guy couldn't code his way out of a wet paper bag O.o
meesterdude 10y ago
Imagine discovering this code — having never seen it before — and trying to work out what happens for non-logged in users that haven’t searched yet. I'd run. Overall, this seems to advocate for moving all your branching logic into one big file. I mean - I guess there could be a situation where I would want this - but it seems decoupled from real world examples and usage. This is functionally, not much different from a function or method with a lot of branching logic embedded in itself. this just changes the format. So I don't see how this is new or better. So I'll share one of my favorites related to reducing if statements that I use with some regularity: before: if user.signed_in? if user.admin? do_magic end end After: return unless user.signed_in? && user.admin? do_magic
dTal 10y ago
If I might offer the author some constructive criticism - this article contains a huge amount of filler, fluff and nonsense, which it descends into at random times in an ADHD-like way. Like the way you use the word "gander" and then suddenly feel compelled to type four paragraphs about geese and pygmy marmosets. This makes it very annoying to read because the reader's flow is constantly interrupted. The liberal use of "um" and the rambling first person narrative style (complete with bizarre roleplay-style actions like "[wriggles interestingly]") combine to present the impression that 1) you do not value the reader's time and 2) you haven't sufficiently distilled what you are actually trying to say. I suspect this article would read very much better if you deleted it and rewrote it from scratch, omitting the cutesy crap and narrative details about your mood while you were thinking about this problem, and saying only what you need to say.
shaftway 10y ago
I like how the author just re-invented if statements. Even still called them "if". Compare: [snip] { title: 'Has the user searched yet?', test: !!pageData.searchKeyword, if: { true: { [snip] }, false: { [snip] }, }, }, [snip] vs. // Has the user searched yet? [snip] if (decisionData.searchKeyword) { [snip] } else { [snip] } I expected something like a state machine, instead of OOJSON.

4 points by bubble_boi 10y ago

geophile 10y ago

Jesus H. Christ, what an irritating writer.

Cozumel 10y ago

That guy couldn't code his way out of a wet paper bag O.o

meesterdude 10y ago

Imagine discovering this code — having never seen it before — and trying to work out what happens for non-logged in users that haven’t searched yet. I'd run. Overall, this seems to advocate for moving all your branching logic into one big file. I mean - I guess there could be a situation where I would want this - but it seems decoupled from real world examples and usage. This is functionally, not much different from a function or method with a lot of branching logic embedded in itself. this just changes the format. So I don't see how this is new or better. So I'll share one of my favorites related to reducing if statements that I use with some regularity: before: if user.signed_in? if user.admin? do_magic end end After: return unless user.signed_in? && user.admin? do_magic

dTal 10y ago

If I might offer the author some constructive criticism - this article contains a huge amount of filler, fluff and nonsense, which it descends into at random times in an ADHD-like way. Like the way you use the word "gander" and then suddenly feel compelled to type four paragraphs about geese and pygmy marmosets. This makes it very annoying to read because the reader's flow is constantly interrupted. The liberal use of "um" and the rambling first person narrative style (complete with bizarre roleplay-style actions like "[wriggles interestingly]") combine to present the impression that 1) you do not value the reader's time and 2) you haven't sufficiently distilled what you are actually trying to say. I suspect this article would read very much better if you deleted it and rewrote it from scratch, omitting the cutesy crap and narrative details about your mood while you were thinking about this problem, and saying only what you need to say.

shaftway 10y ago

I like how the author just re-invented if statements. Even still called them "if". Compare: [snip] { title: 'Has the user searched yet?', test: !!pageData.searchKeyword, if: { true: { [snip] }, false: { [snip] }, }, }, [snip] vs. // Has the user searched yet? [snip] if (decisionData.searchKeyword) { [snip] } else { [snip] } I expected something like a state machine, instead of OOJSON.