sklogic

34 ms·

301.
by sklogic 11y ago
None of the other generic containers library got anything to do with OOP.
302.
by sklogic 11y ago
Generics got 100% nothing to do with OOP.
303.
by sklogic 11y ago
Ever seen STL? It is as anti-OOP by design as it gets.
304.
by sklogic 11y ago
Mind explaining what did you mean by this? For the typical scale of a esp8266 project there is no difference between C and Go and Rust. Actually, C can be much safer of you follow MISRA and use all the appropriate tools.
305.
by sklogic 11y ago
The word "object" comes loaded with a shit ton of ideology. There is absolutely no need to rename the long established terms to simply please a bunch of religious zealots.
306.
by sklogic 11y ago
It was a bad argument disguised as a "question". I rarely tolerate this sort of a discourse.
307.
by sklogic 11y ago
A value, with a type. Nothing else. Stop highjacking everything into your OO religion. If you take everything of a value that originated elsewhere, there will be nothing left in the OOD.
308.
by sklogic 11y ago
Classes are among the worst ways of implementing modularity. Compare them to, say, SML modules.
309.
by sklogic 11y ago
RPi got an SPI interface, which can be used with a standalone FTDI USB-to-SPI.
310.
by sklogic 11y ago
What's wrong with coding in C? You're unlikely to ever need anything too complex on such a device, so C is a totally adequate choice.
311.
by sklogic 11y ago
The chip is highly integrated. You may need a breakout board (like NodeMCU), or simply deadbug it, in order to flash it. You can do it with arduino if you already have one, but a simple standalone FTDI USB-to-serial stick would be sufficien
312.
by sklogic 11y ago
Lisp is not a functional language and should never be used as if it is somehow "functional". Lisp is a homoiconic meta-language , and this is the only thing that matters, not all that functional-schmunctional crap.
313.
by sklogic 11y ago
> it's one of the main motivation factors that have lead to OO. OO got no rights whatsoever to highjack the benefits of the modules. There are some very successful module systems that got absolutely nothing to do with any OO bullsh
314.
by sklogic 11y ago
This "magic bullet" mentality is exactly what is wrong with OOD/OOP. If it was not used to model the reality, I'd find it much more tolerable. > I doubt human beings are smart enough to reason about what good progra
315.
by sklogic 11y ago
"Unnecessary" is the mildest of the OOP issues. A more common one is "damaging and destructive", and you cannot defend this one by simply saying that "my brain understands it better" - it won't magically b
316.
by sklogic 11y ago
What you're talking about is just better code organisation and modularity. It's a shame it is always brought up in defence of the useless OO, as if modularity is an exclusive OO property and not a mere side effect of it.
317.
by sklogic 11y ago
There is no such a thing as a "good OO". You don't need any OO for your example. Polymorphism is not an OO.
318.
by sklogic 11y ago
Ok. Mind naming a single problem domain besides one I've mentioned that should be modelled the OOD way? There are none. And please do not confuse the OOPish language features (which are just poor man modules support in most cases) with
319.
by sklogic 11y ago
But still, it is completely, totally unnecessary everywhere it is used. I only know one problem domain where a form of an OOP is required (although it must be built on top of asynchronous messages, i.e., none of the existing popular OO
320.
by sklogic 11y ago
Given that it is unnecessary in 99.99% of the cases, it is always safe to assume that it is just a garbage, period.
321.
by sklogic 11y ago
I want my VT50 back. 80x11, capitals only, and cool mechanical keys.
322.
by sklogic 11y ago
I doubt there is such a thing as the "average people". There will always be some overlapping skill area and something one can learn from another, even if both got the same number of years of experience and very similar backgrounds
323.
by sklogic 11y ago
> Technology moves so fast I've heard this many times before, but have not seen any evidence yet. Mind listing the technologies that got really, totally obsolete?
324.
by sklogic 11y ago
> And both groups do a disservice to each other when they cannot work together. Why? What's the point of doing anything at all with the hipsters? They're irrelevant. > we greybeards can learn from the greenies Of course! Bu
325.
by sklogic 11y ago
Greybeards do not mix with the hipstor kids well. In the other news, the Pope is catholic.
326.
by sklogic 11y ago
> You can't elevate people. If you're not bound by morals and all that crap, there are some ways: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anton_Makarenko
327.
by sklogic 11y ago
When was the last time when somebody used the words "web API"? When web monkeys say "API" they expect anyone else to understand it as the new default hipstor meaning. It is extremely annoying.
328.
by sklogic 11y ago
My tone is rightfully rude. I hate what the hipstors are turning this world into.
329.
by sklogic 11y ago
Wikipedia have not succumbed to the hipstors so far: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Application_programming_interf... API is an exposed interface of any library, standalone program, etc. It's a very wide term. But
330.
by sklogic 11y ago
I find it quite annoying that recently web hipstors apparently hijacked the term "API", and now everyone assume that by default "API" means something totally different from what it used to.

More ›