archived
stringclasses
2 values
author
stringlengths
3
20
author_fullname
stringlengths
4
12
body
stringlengths
0
22.5k
comment_type
stringclasses
1 value
controversiality
stringclasses
2 values
created_utc
stringlengths
10
10
edited
stringlengths
4
12
gilded
stringclasses
7 values
id
stringlengths
1
7
link_id
stringlengths
7
10
locked
stringclasses
2 values
name
stringlengths
4
10
parent_id
stringlengths
5
10
permalink
stringlengths
41
91
retrieved_on
stringlengths
10
10
score
stringlengths
1
4
subreddit_id
stringclasses
1 value
subreddit_name_prefixed
stringclasses
1 value
subreddit_type
stringclasses
1 value
total_awards_received
stringclasses
19 values
True
mao_neko
null
I like Qt's `Q_OBJECT` / `moc` / `Q_PROPERTY` approach too. Get all the reflection you might need, but only on the classes where it actually matters.
null
0
1317024988
False
0
c2mn0ru
t3_kqtat
null
t1_c2mn0ru
t1_c2mjuzi
null
1427647960
1
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
xcbsmith
null
That kind of depends on the language.
null
0
1317025065
False
0
c2mn0xr
t3_krklz
null
t1_c2mn0xr
t1_c2mmx6n
null
1427647952
5
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
hylje
null
I can receive credit on Stanford courses while attending Helsinki.
null
0
1317025499
False
0
c2mn1tl
t3_kqucu
null
t1_c2mn1tl
t1_c2mkrv5
null
1427647967
1
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
tobycatlin
null
Yeah sure i am jealous of every fuckwit that has made billions by being in the right place at the right time.
null
0
1317025765
False
0
c2mn2bz
t3_kp0u2
null
t1_c2mn2bz
t1_c2m3oh7
null
1427647972
0
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
creporiton
null
yeah but you can't participate in the course. question/answers, assignments, tests
null
0
1317025777
False
0
c2mn2cx
t3_kqucu
null
t1_c2mn2cx
t1_c2mjyc7
null
1427647972
1
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
mariuz
null
This is the type of class to avoid contains all the buzzwords xml , nosql ... I would trust a course that contains only the relational model and use one open source implementation (no is not mysql)
null
0
1317026114
False
0
c2mn2zq
t3_kqucu
null
t1_c2mn2zq
t3_kqucu
null
1427647986
0
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
dan00
null
Hm, I just tried it with vim 7.3 and clang 2.8 (ubuntu 10.10), added the include paths to '.clang_complete' and only got a 'Pattern not found' all the time.
null
0
1317026206
False
0
c2mn359
t3_kr2x5
null
t1_c2mn359
t1_c2mmrnf
null
1427647991
1
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
tobycatlin
null
A great documentary called "Rise of the Geeks" tells the stories of how Microsoft, Apple and other big computer firms got started and became what they are. Gates simply saw a opportunity for a cheap OS and bought one. The genius behind Microsoft was to market a substandard product to the masses and keep it just good enough
null
0
1317026275
False
0
c2mn39q
t3_kp0u2
null
t1_c2mn39q
t1_c2m2qfg
null
1427647991
1
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
eric_t
null
Has anyone been able to get the examples working on a Mac?
null
0
1317026371
False
0
c2mn3g1
t3_kqqd5
null
t1_c2mn3g1
t1_c2mhahm
null
1427647992
1
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
Teekoo
null
>Yeah sure i am jealous of every **fuckwit** that has made billions by being in the right place at the right time.
null
0
1317026502
False
0
c2mn3pb
t3_kp0u2
null
t1_c2mn3pb
t1_c2mn2bz
null
1427647995
1
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
tobycatlin
null
What's your **point**?
null
0
1317026703
False
0
c2mn42w
t3_kp0u2
null
t1_c2mn42w
t1_c2mn3pb
null
1427647999
0
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
Jookia
null
Not programming.
null
0
1317026919
False
0
c2mn4gz
t3_krmpy
null
t1_c2mn4gz
t3_krmpy
null
1427648001
4
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
[deleted]
null
[deleted]
null
0
1317026928
False
0
c2mn4hl
t3_krklz
null
t1_c2mn4hl
t1_c2mn0xr
null
1427648001
1
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
Peaker
null
That's the 1-2% I was talking about. Overall, performance remained roughly the same (slightly improved) and particular examples (globals/builtins access) were far faster.
null
0
1317027013
False
0
c2mn4n8
t3_kos4z
null
t1_c2mn4n8
t1_c2mhrsn
null
1427648003
1
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
QuestionMarker
null
> modularity I do not think this word means what you think it means. Modular code will inevitably be *larger* than the same code written monolithically, if only because module definition and use requires explicit lines of code.
null
0
1317027063
False
0
c2mn4qq
t3_krklz
null
t1_c2mn4qq
t1_c2mmg5e
null
1427648004
11
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
fjonk
null
The downvotes has more to do with the stupidity. In a thread about how you do something in a piece of software that kind of reply is stupid and pointless. Trolling? Who cares, I can't be bothered to find out if someone is trolling or not, I'm not 12.
null
0
1317027700
False
0
c2mn5wc
t3_kravz
null
t1_c2mn5wc
t1_c2mn0me
null
1427648020
6
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
ascii
null
If that's what you took from the article, then you're missing the point the author was trying to make. If you account for code size, then traditional code quality metrics like interface depth, class coupling and number of methods per class have no impact on the actual number of bugs. So two projects, both 500 000 lines long, where one is a few dozens of files with plain old classes communicating directly with each other and the other is divided into a thousand classes with massive inheritance trees and where all communication between classes happens through an extremely enterprisey object broker will have roughly the same number of bugs. And that is a very interesting result, given that there are huge numbers of firms that evaluate code quality on these metrics.
null
0
1317027734
False
0
c2mn5yr
t3_krklz
null
t1_c2mn5yr
t1_c2mmk64
null
1427648017
5
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
[deleted]
null
maybe it's supposed to be a metaphor for TDD..
null
0
1317027906
False
0
c2mn68n
t3_krmpy
null
t1_c2mn68n
t1_c2mn4gz
null
1427648019
0
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
D_duck
null
What font is this? it hurts the eyes
null
0
1317028891
False
0
c2mn7w5
t3_krklz
null
t1_c2mn7w5
t3_krklz
null
1427648045
8
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
davemcuk
null
This is completely and utterly illogical, and reeks of strawman concluding. A better conclusion is: Using more than the required number of lines of code to solve a problem is waste, and waste leads to problems. or The number of individual problems to be solved dictate the size of the code produced.
null
0
1317029198
False
0
c2mn8d4
t3_krklz
null
t1_c2mn8d4
t3_krklz
null
1427648052
4
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
sulumits-retsambew
null
In related news "Programs of size 0 have 0 bugs".
null
0
1317029417
False
0
c2mn8o1
t3_krklz
null
t1_c2mn8o1
t3_krklz
null
1427648062
33
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
ninjeff
null
Really? *Really?* > Trying to open a file and finding it not there is hardly an exceptional circumstance, for instance. [File.Exists](http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/system.io.file.exists.aspx) > Similarly, trying to convert a text string to a number – that frequently fails, particularly in my line of work. [int.TryParse](http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/f02979c7.aspx)
null
0
1317029536
False
0
c2mn8v8
t3_krodl
null
t1_c2mn8v8
t3_krodl
null
1427648056
14
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
LenHolgate
null
The comments about the API issues are valid though...
null
0
1317029657
False
0
c2mn91y
t3_krodl
null
t1_c2mn91y
t3_krodl
null
1427648067
7
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
elperroborrachotoo
null
Interestingly, OO metrics are supposed to control for exactly the variations you describe, to provide a comparable prediction for, among others, maintenance cost and fault rates. The study is not about the benefits of counting lines. It casts doubt on the benefits of *other* measures. ----- It simply says this: **After you control for code size, typical OO metrics do not correlate with fault rate.** **A careful interpretation** could be that *code structure does not affect error rate* significantly. Maybe we all have learnt to structure code the way we make less mistakes - even though that might differ from person to person. Maybe code structure doesn't matter at all. **A slightly bolder interpretation** would be: *language choice matters*. A language that allows simple expression of the problem may decrease fault rate. **A warranted conclusion** is that we need to reevaluate the known correlations between OO metrics and fault rate. **A possible policy** to derive would be to spend more resources testing large modules. Most of the code size fluctuations are orders of magnitude less if you don't compare across different code bases.
null
0
1317030313
False
0
c2mna5f
t3_krklz
null
t1_c2mna5f
t1_c2mmtvy
null
1427648072
43
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
matthiasB
null
Cardo
null
0
1317030401
False
0
c2mnab3
t3_krklz
null
t1_c2mnab3
t1_c2mn7w5
null
1427648074
1
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
elperroborrachotoo
null
*sigh* Michelle Bachman is looking for a science advisor, I heard.
null
0
1317030404
False
0
c2mnabb
t3_krklz
null
t1_c2mnabb
t1_c2mmk64
null
1427648074
0
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
littlemetal
null
So a guy wants to write a math heavy sound file analyzer. This means passing a lot of data between managed and unmanaged, if he is using C libraries (which it sounds like, why else would he need to). This is not the easiest thing to do. Why is he surprised... no one wrote the library he wants in c# yet? Is that all this is about? I can't honestly believe this guy is an MVP. Only thing I can say is right is the int.Parse() throwing an exception. It *should* throw one, but there really should have been a better, native, way to test the conversion a long time ago. TryParse is ok, but came late. Seriously, it's still just a few line wrapper function. Nothing to see here... managed/unmanaged can be hard. Whine.
null
0
1317030652
False
0
c2mnao0
t3_krodl
null
t1_c2mnao0
t3_krodl
null
1428192742
6
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
howfun
null
As opposed to soap.
null
0
1317031077
False
0
c2mnbb3
t3_kpk8d
null
t1_c2mnbb3
t1_c2m8us8
null
1427648088
1
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
rawlyn
null
I hate the way he claims that .NET can't handle audio files, then goes on to explain that his real gripe is that he can't find an FFT library, which isn't audio-specific.
null
0
1317031208
False
0
c2mnbhy
t3_krodl
null
t1_c2mnbhy
t3_krodl
null
1427648091
4
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
sztomi
null
The most ridiculous is `\si` which maps to `if` wtf? (don't get me wrong, I do have mappings and abbreviations in my .vimrc, but mapping to something that is longer than what you want to type is retarded). Also, I prefer snipmate for this.
null
0
1317031249
False
0
c2mnbkf
t3_kr2x5
null
t1_c2mnbkf
t1_c2mj2vt
null
1427648092
1
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
mycatverbs
null
We have one. It's called "anonymous Diffie-Hellman." It's in SSL, you can turn it on with mod_ssl and Apache, and it's turned off by default specifically because it's trivially vulnerable to MITM.
null
0
1317031357
False
0
c2mnbpy
t3_kp1b5
null
t1_c2mnbpy
t1_c2mkcvl
null
1427648092
2
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
rawlyn
null
*But there's a chart!*
null
0
1317031442
False
0
c2mnbur
t3_krmpy
null
t1_c2mnbur
t1_c2mn4gz
null
1427648094
2
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
Poddster
null
>How did you know if rawlex had any previous experience under his belt before trying to write his "graphics engine"? Because he doesn't know anything on that page? >I am not sure what you're going on about. A graphics engine is simply what you use to render graphics to the screen within your application. Yes, it is. But when people make a "graphics engine" as opposed to "a game" they're making a more general purpose library that can be used by any game/app. How an you write a library if you have no knowledge of what is required from the API? reddit can downvote me all it wants, but all it's doing is encouraging people to write APIs blind.
null
0
1317031486
False
0
c2mnbwz
t3_kqqd5
null
t1_c2mnbwz
t1_c2mkv7e
null
1427648095
0
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
johnnieinlab
null
Very simple and straightforward tool to make wireframes. It has a variety of stencils, working links between sketches, a nice templating scheme and even html export.
null
0
1317032191
False
0
c2mncwr
t3_krp4h
null
t1_c2mncwr
t3_krp4h
null
1427648108
1
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
tamrix
null
For me there's nothing that compares with Spring for dependancy injection. Aspect orientated programming sucks in C#.
null
0
1317032209
False
0
c2mncxr
t3_krodl
null
t1_c2mncxr
t3_krodl
null
1427648108
2
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
jabatti
null
I'm drawing essentially all my knowledge from the papers published in the Netflix competition. The [paper describing the winning algorithm](http://www.commendo.at/UserFiles/commendo/File/GrandPrize2009_BigChaos.pdf) (or a combination of them) describes nicely how the different algorithm families compare to each other. It isn't a very gentle introduction to the algorithms, though, so you may want to find other resources for figuring them out. My understanding about the kNN is that it works best when combined with some other algorithm. The input data in the Netflix competition is very sparse (~0.1% density) and there's a large amount of users (~500k), which makes running the kNN on it directly both slow and rather fickle. Running it on the features gotten from an SVD model apparently does a much better job, and can probably be much faster too.
null
0
1317032535
False
0
c2mndfe
t3_knoub
null
t1_c2mndfe
t1_c2lz1q7
null
1427648117
2
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
Kevin_Raven
null
Sure they do - I can't get them to run
null
0
1317032640
False
0
c2mndka
t3_krklz
null
t1_c2mndka
t1_c2mn8o1
null
1427648119
9
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
codingcanary
null
Maybe just me, but this doesn't look like it contains 'quite complicated issues' at all. I would also put no trust in the experience of a programmer who thinks XOR is 'encryption. Not your blog by any chance is it?
null
0
1317032794
False
0
c2mndsw
t3_krkg3
null
t1_c2mndsw
t3_krkg3
null
1427648121
1
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
mikaelhg
null
This is stupid.... this is /r/programming!
null
0
1317032941
False
0
c2mne01
t3_krklz
null
t1_c2mne01
t1_c2mn8d4
null
1427648122
-3
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
[deleted]
null
[deleted]
null
0
1317032958
False
0
c2mne0v
t3_krklz
null
t1_c2mne0v
t1_c2mmuef
null
1427648122
2
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
_Fil_is_TylerDurden_
null
Ok, for just one minute, let me have just have a liiiiitle bit of hope.
null
0
1317033433
False
0
c2mnepl
t3_krpio
null
t1_c2mnepl
t3_krpio
null
1427648131
2
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
[deleted]
null
I'm a developer - I prefer gleaming white on black, or luminous matrix green on black. I like to have the text etched into my retinas so I can read it later when I'm trying to sleep.
null
0
1317034289
False
0
c2mng1u
t3_krklz
null
t1_c2mng1u
t1_c2mmjzv
null
1427648149
8
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
destraht
null
My metric is just how favourably does god smile upon the code.
null
0
1317034312
False
0
c2mng2n
t3_krklz
null
t1_c2mng2n
t3_krklz
null
1427648151
2
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
bulldada
null
I've written several evented IO servers in PHP, it's really not that bad, no worse than writing an evented server in C. It also outperformed every other language I tested on a simple 'hello world' socket server benchmark with high concurrency.
null
0
1317034501
False
0
c2mngcm
t3_kq27q
null
t1_c2mngcm
t1_c2mi9t4
null
1427648153
1
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
akoprowski
null
Yup, we will certainly want to (and will) produce XHTML5, however I'm not sure the time is ripe for that, what with the specifications still being in the works...
null
0
1317034691
False
0
c2mngno
t3_kn8ra
null
t1_c2mngno
t1_c2lvyxb
null
1427648159
1
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
elperroborrachotoo
null
Yes, but testability is only one stake in the design.
null
0
1317034693
False
0
c2mngnu
t3_kq001
null
t1_c2mngnu
t1_c2ma4kl
null
1427648159
0
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
IRBMe
null
Lines of code don't always correlate with amount of code, nor does amount of code always correlate with the complexity of the code, and I would say it's more likely that the complexity of the code correlates with the number of bugs better than number of lines or amount of code. For example: if (foo) { bar(); } else { baz(); } Compared to: if (foo) bar(); else baz(); The second version has 1/8th the number of lines as the first version, but is it more complex? No. Is the first version 8 times more likely to contain bugs? No. Is it more likely to contain bugs *at all*? No. If anything, it's slightly more maintainable.
null
0
1317034827
False
0
c2mngvy
t3_krklz
null
t1_c2mngvy
t1_c2mmxgo
null
1427648167
2
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
foonix
null
A database can act as its own abstraction layer using views, triggers, and stored procedures. For example, a view can act as an abstract interface to two or more logically related tables. An app doesn't have to know exactly what a stored procedure does, and a doesn't even have to know a trigger exists.
null
0
1317034848
False
0
c2mngx3
t3_kqucu
null
t1_c2mngx3
t1_c2mlcg2
null
1427648167
5
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
BobTheSCV
null
It makes sense as a visitor pattern. Because eating is breaking down something into constituent nutrients. This requires detailed implementation knowledge. It should look something like: *Food*: acceptConsumer(consumer); // what the book calls "eat" ~~~~ *Consumer*: eat(Food) { food->acceptConsumer(this); } eatNutrient(Nutrient, int quantity); eatCalories(int kcal); etc. ~~~~ *Apple* : public *Food*: acceptConsumer(consumer) { consumer.eatNutrient(VitaminC, 0.7); consumer.eatCalories(150); }
null
0
1317034848
True
0
c2mngx4
t3_kr0ir
null
t1_c2mngx4
t1_c2mmq9q
null
1428192736
1
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
heptadecagram
null
[smr begs to differ](http://www.ioccc.org/years.html#1994_smr).
null
0
1317034875
False
0
c2mngyl
t3_krklz
null
t1_c2mngyl
t1_c2mndka
null
1428192737
13
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
akoprowski
null
You may want to take a look at the newer entry on the subject, describing the changes we made following community complains: http://blog.opalang.org/2011/09/opa-license-strikes-again.html. TL;DR: Now it's free, except for BIG companies.
null
0
1317034913
False
0
c2mnh08
t3_kn8ra
null
t1_c2mnh08
t1_c2lscys
null
1428192737
0
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
akoprowski
null
Yes, I do. I'm not trying to hide it. It's just a bit impractical to include such a disclaimer in every comment I post.
null
0
1317034957
False
0
c2mnh29
t3_kn8ra
null
t1_c2mnh29
t1_c2ls2xq
null
1428192738
1
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
ezekiel
null
And, a 100,000 line program with 10,000+ classes barely runs at all. The only thing worse than gigantic classes and methods are classes with one-line methods, all affecting a pile of class-global variables. This identifies the real bug-inducing factor: sloppy manipulation of state.
null
0
1317034974
False
0
c2mnh39
t3_krklz
null
t1_c2mnh39
t1_c2mmuef
null
1427648173
2
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
rib-bit
null
TIL :)
null
0
1317035031
False
0
c2mnh66
t3_krklz
null
t1_c2mnh66
t1_c2mngyl
null
1427648179
2
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
JL235
null
I think that would only take up a small percentage of the total code base. The majority of the code would still end up being the implementation of those classes. I think the reason why they would be less buggy is because each class is doing less work. If you split code up into smaller tasks, each individual task becomes easier to write and debug, because it is easier to reason about them. It also makes it much easier to leverage code re-use, allowing bugs to be found earlier (since that section of code will be hit more often). Code re-use should actually allow a with the same number of lines, but with more classes, do more work.
null
0
1317035345
False
0
c2mnho0
t3_krklz
null
t1_c2mnho0
t1_c2mmx6n
null
1427648185
1
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
TWith2Sugars
null
I had to build a maze generator / solver in Mozart back in uni, I enjoyed playing with the language. Forgot about it until this post.
null
0
1317035426
False
0
c2mnhsb
t3_kpwjl
null
t1_c2mnhsb
t1_c2m9rl4
null
1427648181
1
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
deadowl
null
Not off the top of my head. It's basic encapsulation if you really think about it though. Rather than have a class/function handle its queries, have a class/function for each query and reuse the query classes/functions. That way you just need to swap out the code in the query classes rather than attack a mindf*ck of functional dependencies anywhere and everywhere (I've seen it too many times). Foonix's mention of views, triggers, etc are good examples of encapsulation within the database layer itself, but maintaining encapsulation in your other code layers is good practice.
null
0
1317035511
False
0
c2mnhx3
t3_kqucu
null
t1_c2mnhx3
t1_c2mlcg2
null
1427648183
3
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
JL235
null
Like most programmers, the way I normally try to avoid bugs is through code re-use. That is to have tasks performed once, rather then in multiple places, so the application tends to end up flowing through the same code paths multiple times. That way if there is a bug in a class or a module, then the bug is likely to be hit more often and from more places, and so become easier to spot and fix. It gives my modules/classes more battle-testing during development. In a sense, it is about having as few 'code paths' as possible, or to overlap them as much as possible. I'd be interested in seeing a study that attempted to analyze how many ways data can flow through your program, branch into other sections, or how many tasks are performed using separate code; all in relation to the number of bugs in the project.
null
0
1317036021
False
0
c2mnirq
t3_krklz
null
t1_c2mnirq
t3_krklz
null
1427648192
9
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
taw
null
I'd guess this coding style: if (foo) { bar(); } else { baz(); } to lead to more bugs than this coding style: if (foo) { bar(); } else { baz(); } simply because in the first case programmer can see less code on screen. It's probably not a big difference, but these differences add up. There's definitely a point where further conciseness just makes matters worse, but current programming practice is to err on side of verbosity much more often than on side of conciseness, so moving towards more concise styles from what people do now would mostly be pure benefit.
null
0
1317036070
False
0
c2mniug
t3_krklz
null
t1_c2mniug
t1_c2mngvy
null
1427648192
2
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
alexeyr
null
> A language that allows simple expression of the problem may decrease fault rate. However, did the study compare code in different languages?
null
0
1317036095
False
0
c2mniw7
t3_krklz
null
t1_c2mniw7
t1_c2mna5f
null
1427648193
4
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
rampion
null
What language are you using?
null
0
1317036160
False
0
c2mnj06
t3_krklz
null
t1_c2mnj06
t1_c2mn4qq
null
1427648195
-3
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
troyanonymous1
null
"Don't Repeat Yourself"
null
0
1317036177
False
0
c2mnj18
t3_krklz
null
t1_c2mnj18
t1_c2mnirq
null
1427648195
11
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
name_was_taken
null
I love the idea that someone thinks there are low-resolution mandelbrot programs. The whole idea behind fractals is that they have infinite resolution.
null
0
1317036327
False
0
c2mnja9
t3_krpem
null
t1_c2mnja9
t3_krpem
null
1427648196
9
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
IRBMe
null
> I'd guess this coding style ... to lead to more bugs than this coding style ... simply because in the first case programmer can see less code on screen. Firstly, what kind of programmer is using such a small screen that using a different brace style or a bit more whitespace leads to significant problems? We're no longer working in terminals that are limited to displaying 25 lines of code, and if you are, then I would say that your equipment is the problem, not your coding style. Even when working on a terminal, I can easily see more than 50 lines of code. Secondly, I'm not sure of your reasoning for why not being able to see more code on the screen will necessarily result in more bugs. Why would that be? What kinds of bugs would I make that I would *not* if I was able to see about 10 more lines of code on the screen? Thirdly, if an entire method can't fit on a reasonable sized screen, it's probably too large and that is an argument for refactoring it, not cramming the code together so that it fits. That would be missing the point entirely. Finally, I'm not arguing for one brace style over another, or for conciseness of code, so you seem to have missed the point entirely. The point was that lines of code do not necessarily correlate with the amount of code. One can fit lots of code on a single line or can break it up over multiple lines without affecting the complexity of the code. Additionally, the amount of code there is also does not necessarily correlate with complexity, and it is far more often code *complexity* which leads to bugs.
null
0
1317036406
True
0
c2mnjfd
t3_krklz
null
t1_c2mnjfd
t1_c2mniug
null
1427648197
3
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
kraln
null
Guilty, actually :-)
null
0
1317036759
False
0
c2mnk2h
t3_kr2x5
null
t1_c2mnk2h
t1_c2mjtyq
null
1427648202
2
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
[deleted]
null
That may be the case. Netbeans still sucks as an IDE. Sorry to say it, but it just does.
null
0
1317036993
False
0
c2mnkh2
t3_kq0ms
null
t1_c2mnkh2
t1_c2mbcp2
null
1427648206
1
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
[deleted]
null
Herp code size increase -> more bugs derp Isn't this kind of a "well duh" article?
null
0
1317037040
False
0
c2mnkjl
t3_krklz
null
t1_c2mnkjl
t3_krklz
null
1427648206
0
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
axilmar
null
> Right but your problem came from not using a reference type in the beginning not, "the struct vs class dichotomy requires upfront knowledge of how a type will be used." And so is not an example of such an issue. But I didn't need a reference type in the beginning. That's exactly the problem. > I disagree with this. But you are also leaving out the polymorphic switch. And best I can tell your example isn't about value vs polymorphic, but value vs. reference and for that you do have struct. Yes, my example wasn't about polymorphism, but that's irrelevant to this discussion. In C++, I can make structs/classes polymorphic, if I choose to. It is entirely up to me. > Structs have a reference semantic through pointers and ref-counting. which is silly, because class references ARE pointers, although they are not ref-counted. What if I want to use ref-counting with classes? What if I want my structs to be garbage collected? You see, there is no real difference between structs and classes. They are both records. D artificially separates them, which is a problem.
null
0
1317037155
False
0
c2mnkqn
t3_kljc0
null
t1_c2mnkqn
t1_c2m1g5e
null
1427648210
1
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
kraln
null
I don't know why it is that you think I'm not in the real world. Code completion and stuff is part of the downfall, how that code got to be that way, because you can still edit and update stuff even if it doesn't make sense just based on what your IDE tells you. It took me about three months to get the hang of how the whole system works, and now I can add to it without breaking anything. If I don't remember where something is supposed to be, I go trace through the execution and find it. Novel concept, I suppose. Oh, and by the way? SLOCCOUNT: Totals grouped by language (dominant language first): ansic: 9261184 (94.55%) asm: 252361 (2.58%) sh: 123484 (1.26%) perl: 50517 (0.52%)
null
0
1317037156
False
0
c2mnkqo
t3_kr2x5
null
t1_c2mnkqo
t1_c2mk6kx
null
1427648210
2
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
want_to_want
null
Define "very simple" How many lines of code (configuration included) for "hello world"?
null
0
1317037203
False
0
c2mnkto
t3_kn8ra
null
t1_c2mnkto
t1_c2ltf0x
null
1427648211
1
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
JL235
null
My point is though, could that be measured?
null
0
1317037636
False
0
c2mnlo1
t3_krklz
null
t1_c2mnlo1
t1_c2mnj18
null
1427648223
2
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
iaH6eeBu
null
Another reason for code-golfing
null
0
1317037667
False
0
c2mnlq0
t3_krklz
null
t1_c2mnlq0
t3_krklz
null
1427648229
3
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
disidentadvisor
null
I assumed they would limit enrollment in each class. I could be completely incorrect with that belief and simply not fully understand the offering.
null
0
1317037680
False
0
c2mnlqv
t3_kqucu
null
t1_c2mnlqv
t1_c2mmfdw
null
1427648229
1
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
[deleted]
null
Give me a clang_refactor plugin and I will be high as a kite!
null
0
1317038015
False
0
c2mnmd2
t3_kr2x5
null
t1_c2mnmd2
t1_c2mmd7n
null
1427648232
0
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
judgej2
null
In my experience, the amount of duplicated code is a really good indicator of the bugs I will find. The more duplicated code, the more bugs. I do, however, think that the root cause of that is the number of bugs that are introduced by making changes in code where there is a lot of redundancy. It may be reliable on first using it, but it falls apart quickly.
null
0
1317038050
False
0
c2mnmen
t3_krklz
null
t1_c2mnmen
t3_krklz
null
1427648235
3
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
__j_random_hacker
null
I don't know much about Javascript, but it's always interesting to see languages that provide both an object system *and* closures separately -- since the latter always strikes me as the perfect way to implement the former. (Perl is another example.) It seems to me that the only reason *not* to use closures as the basis for objects is because supporting closures implies that handling the function call stack becomes much more complicated -- it's no longer a "stack" at all, since a stack frame can now remain live long after its parent frame has disappeared. But if you (as the language designer) have decided to pay the price of supporting closures, why not use them for this? My feeling is that the closure approach you describe is much to be preferred for anything besides a quick hack, because of its strict no-meddling policy. If this approach becomes popular, then future Javascript engines will optimise for it to remove the overhead of storing multiple copies of the actual functions, just as V8 optimises heavily for common use cases now.
null
0
1317038139
False
0
c2mnmkk
t3_kroia
null
t1_c2mnmkk
t3_kroia
null
1427648234
8
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
merlinm
null
One letter variable names here I come!
null
0
1317038144
False
0
c2mnmky
t3_krklz
null
t1_c2mnmky
t3_krklz
null
1427648234
4
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
D_duck
null
Enroll? Can't I just watch the lecture videos, like MIT?
null
0
1317038146
False
0
c2mnml2
t3_kqucu
null
t1_c2mnml2
t3_kqucu
null
1427648234
1
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
tiftik
null
This article might help: http://zwiener.org/vimautocomplete.html
null
0
1317038180
False
0
c2mnmn6
t3_kr2x5
null
t1_c2mnmn6
t1_c2mn359
null
1427648238
2
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
judgej2
null
> How do you determine whether a given size is particularly small for a given program? I think you look for redundant and repeated code. Strip the code down to its information content, and that gives you a pretty good feel for the real complexity.
null
0
1317038184
False
0
c2mnmne
t3_krklz
null
t1_c2mnmne
t1_c2mmtvy
null
1427648238
2
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
perlgeek
null
I'd prefer to have a choice.
null
0
1317038215
False
0
c2mnmp9
t3_kn8ra
null
t1_c2mnmp9
t1_c2lpyo3
null
1427648238
1
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
ethraax
null
[Fixed](http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/wzxffy8c\(v=vs.80\).aspx).
null
0
1317038317
False
0
c2mnmwl
t3_krd8f
null
t1_c2mnmwl
t1_c2mmhao
null
1427648238
2
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
m0llusk
null
Lots of people love Python, but the idea that the format of the code is also code gives me the willies.
null
0
1317038357
False
0
c2mnmz8
t3_krpem
null
t1_c2mnmz8
t3_krpem
null
1427648239
4
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
AlyoshaV
null
>However, it will only run on Python <= 2.7; Python 3 is not supported. Author is worse than Hitler
null
0
1317038509
False
0
c2mnnb5
t3_krpem
null
t1_c2mnnb5
t3_krpem
null
1427648243
-13
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
preshing
null
Forgive me...
null
0
1317038548
False
0
c2mnne0
t3_krpem
null
t1_c2mnne0
t1_c2mnnb5
null
1427648244
17
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
ntrel2
null
Did you read the submission? D uses braces but disallows any programmer-ambiguous syntax. Where is the problem? D's solution could easily be used in all C-brace languages.
null
0
1317039003
False
0
c2mnoct
t3_kooiy
null
t1_c2mnoct
t1_c2m88ml
null
1427648263
2
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
[deleted]
null
[deleted]
null
0
1317039004
True
0
c2mnocw
t3_krd8f
null
t1_c2mnocw
t1_c2ml0if
null
1427648263
1
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
icebraining
null
Closures aren't necessarily functional. The functional approach is to eliminate side-effect, by not relying on mutable state. But most languages implement closures which capture mutable variables, which goes against this approach. "Pure" functional languages only let closures capture *immutable* variables, but you obviously can't easily rewrite a class with class-level fields using them. A whole new way to look at the problem is required.
null
0
1317039149
False
0
c2mnonx
t3_krklz
null
t1_c2mnonx
t1_c2mmzp2
null
1427648272
1
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
Gotebe
null
I'd venture that papers like the one discussed do know about [cyclomatic complexity](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyclomatic_complexity) (and other stuff) by now. That is, let's all forget line count.
null
0
1317039159
False
0
c2mnooi
t3_krklz
null
t1_c2mnooi
t1_c2mmxgo
null
1427648272
1
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
robertcrowther
null
> Firstly, what kind of programmer is using such a small screen that using a different brace style or a bit more whitespace leads to significant problems? Monitors seem to be getting wider rather than taller. For cost effectiveness we're developing on screens optimized for viewing movies.
null
0
1317039160
False
0
c2mnooj
t3_krklz
null
t1_c2mnooj
t1_c2mnjfd
null
1427648272
2
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
MrSqueezles
null
I'm pretty sure that's not what the paper is about at all. The abstract from the actual paper, not the blog post about the paper, talks about class size, not total size. It seems that they first attempt to show that nobody has ever thought that class size mattered, that they were the first ones to think of this metric. Then, they examine one C++ application to make their point. They show that using class size alone is enough to show which parts of that one application are fault-prone. http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.20.2141
null
0
1317039172
False
0
c2mnopj
t3_krklz
null
t1_c2mnopj
t1_c2mn5yr
null
1427648272
3
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
[deleted]
null
I can see 47 lines of code, and it bothers me that we have to use the Allman style. And it also bothers me when somebody goes over 80 (max 90) columns.
null
0
1317039179
False
0
c2mnoq7
t3_krklz
null
t1_c2mnoq7
t1_c2mnjfd
null
1427648274
1
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
runedk
null
Creating an individual copy of each procedure for each object is not only wasteful in terms of memory (both space and allocation time), but effectively prevents many useful optimizations available in modern JavaScript implementations such as just-in-time compilation of frequently-called procedures.
null
0
1317039190
False
0
c2mnorb
t3_kroia
null
t1_c2mnorb
t3_kroia
null
1427648274
4
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
MrSqueezles
null
I'm pretty sure that's not what the paper is about at all. The abstract from the actual paper talks about class size, not total size. It seems that they first attempt to show that nobody has ever thought that class size mattered, that they were the first ones to think of this metric. Then, they examine one C++ application to make their point. They show that using class size alone is enough to show which parts of that one application are fault-prone. I would read the paper, but none of the download links are working. http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.20.2141
null
0
1317039284
False
0
c2mnoxv
t3_krklz
null
t1_c2mnoxv
t3_krklz
null
1427648276
3
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
hackinthebochs
null
I think the reason is more fundamental than that. Classes provide abstraction. Code with more abstraction primitives have fewer points of interaction, aka fewer moving parts to grind against each other inadvertently. Adding abstraction primitives to your domain reduces the potential for unintended interactions, and thus reduces the number of potential bugs.
null
0
1317039296
False
0
c2mnoyx
t3_krklz
null
t1_c2mnoyx
t1_c2mmx6n
null
1427648277
1
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
__j_random_hacker
null
You make a good point in distinguishing between program size and class size -- something the blog article actually linked to by the OP gets wrong. Thanks!
null
0
1317039497
False
0
c2mnpel
t3_krklz
null
t1_c2mnpel
t1_c2mmuef
null
1427648280
2
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
skilldrick
null
I absolutely agree about optimisation - in the future I can foresee a lot more engines optimising for closures in JS. Then again, future EcmaScript versions will have more options for object creation, like setting properties to non-enumerable, and freezing objects etc., so they may be a more attractive option as well.
null
0
1317039502
False
0
c2mnpf4
t3_kroia
null
t1_c2mnpf4
t1_c2mnmkk
null
1427648282
5
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
__s
null
I was figuring it meant arbitrary precision numbers. But the code uses floats
null
0
1317039536
False
0
c2mnphv
t3_krpem
null
t1_c2mnphv
t1_c2mnja9
null
1427648283
3
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
adolfojp
null
Have you tried using [Spring.net](http://www.springframework.net/) or any of the other alternatives??
null
0
1317039546
False
0
c2mnpip
t3_krodl
null
t1_c2mnpip
t1_c2mncxr
null
1427648283
1
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
skilldrick
null
Which is why I said I use objects "when memory is a concern". Not using closures because of concerns about memory usage when you haven't measured it is premature optimisation. If you're only producing a handful of objects then there's generally not going to be a measurable performance hit. The important thing is to use the appropriate tool for the job, not to throw out a whole style of programming because it's "wasteful". If all we cared about was memory usage everybody would be coding in C.
null
0
1317039660
False
0
c2mnprp
t3_kroia
null
t1_c2mnprp
t1_c2mnorb
null
1427648296
1
t5_2fwo
null
null
null