The Anti-If Campaign
-
soon, the only people who knows how computers actually work will be the people who write compilers.
Come in here, dear boy, have a cigar: you don't need to know how the machine actually works to write a compiler for our managed language. :-D
If the Lord God Almighty had consulted me before embarking upon the Creation, I would have recommended something simpler. -- Alfonso the Wise, 13th Century King of Castile.
This is going on my arrogant assumptions. You may have a superb reason why I'm completely wrong. -- Iain Clarke
[My articles] -
Most developers have no understanding of Object Oriented programming beyond the text book definition. There are some great things you can do with correctly designed OO. One really neat pattern is the Null object pattern so instead of checking for null when you call a method you have a predefined action already established on null. But then I am a dreamer.
Need custom software developed? I do custom programming based primarily on MS tools with an emphasis on C# development and consulting. A man said to the universe: "Sir I exist!" "However," replied the universe, "The fact has not created in me A sense of obligation." --Stephen Crane
Ennis Ray Lynch, Jr. wrote:
One really neat pattern is the Null object pattern so instead of checking for null when you call a method you have a predefined action already established on null.
Arguing the usefulness of such an object in
OOPlooks like arguing about the empty-set in set theory. However it really depends on the (project) context if you really need an Object Oriented approach or not. :)If the Lord God Almighty had consulted me before embarking upon the Creation, I would have recommended something simpler. -- Alfonso the Wise, 13th Century King of Castile.
This is going on my arrogant assumptions. You may have a superb reason why I'm completely wrong. -- Iain Clarke
[My articles] -
Just in case you haven't noticed, there is an "anti-if campaign[^] out there. Now, I am thinking of starting an "anti-for" one; and "anti-switch" one; and - well you get the picture. Too bad anti-goto is an old news.
-
Yeah, and I'm sick of seeing those variables all over the code like they run the place. Let's get rid of those also. :~
While you're at it, will you get rid of those stinking operators and loops? They're just noise.
"WPF has many lovers. It's a veritable porn star!" - Josh Smith
As Braveheart once said, "You can take our freedom but you'll never take our Hobnobs!" - Martin Hughes.
-
While you're at it, will you get rid of those stinking operators and loops? They're just noise.
"WPF has many lovers. It's a veritable porn star!" - Josh Smith
As Braveheart once said, "You can take our freedom but you'll never take our Hobnobs!" - Martin Hughes.
sounds like you're ready for a nice functional language! the results just ... happen. poof!
-
sounds like you're ready for a nice functional language! the results just ... happen. poof!
To be honest, I'll be happy if all those alphanumerics, symbols and punctuation characters go as well. Whitespace is just so beautiful - that's all I want to see, and no need to comment it.
"WPF has many lovers. It's a veritable porn star!" - Josh Smith
As Braveheart once said, "You can take our freedom but you'll never take our Hobnobs!" - Martin Hughes.
-
Nemanja Trifunovic wrote:
Now, I am thinking of starting an "anti-for" one;
How about just starting with an anti-absurdity movement?
.45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly
-----
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
-----
"The staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - J. Jystad, 2001John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote:
How about just starting with an anti-absurdity movement?
Nah, that would be absurd! Marc
I'm not overthinking the problem, I just felt like I needed a small, unimportant, uninteresting rant! - Martin Hart Turner
-
Just in case you haven't noticed, there is an "anti-if campaign[^] out there. Now, I am thinking of starting an "anti-for" one; and "anti-switch" one; and - well you get the picture. Too bad anti-goto is an old news.
Nemanja Trifunovic wrote:
Just in case you haven't noticed, there is an "anti-if campaign[^] out there.
Actually, it makes sense. I've seen a lot of code where if statements could be replaced, and the code much more robust, by proper OOP. In fact, I'm guilty of that! Marc
I'm not overthinking the problem, I just felt like I needed a small, unimportant, uninteresting rant! - Martin Hart Turner
-
Just in case you haven't noticed, there is an "anti-if campaign[^] out there. Now, I am thinking of starting an "anti-for" one; and "anti-switch" one; and - well you get the picture. Too bad anti-goto is an old news.
Anti-increment? No more confusing i++ or ++i, just i += 1; until i etc;
-
Never mind a calculator - implement a coin toss simulator for who goes first in a football match!
All those who believe in psycho kinesis, raise my hand.
Surely you could use any tosser for that, without specially implementing one? As long as it bares the caveat "This code was generated by a tool"
-
Most developers have no understanding of Object Oriented programming beyond the text book definition. There are some great things you can do with correctly designed OO. One really neat pattern is the Null object pattern so instead of checking for null when you call a method you have a predefined action already established on null. But then I am a dreamer.
Need custom software developed? I do custom programming based primarily on MS tools with an emphasis on C# development and consulting. A man said to the universe: "Sir I exist!" "However," replied the universe, "The fact has not created in me A sense of obligation." --Stephen Crane
Ennis Ray Lynch, Jr. wrote:
instead of checking for null when you call a method you have a predefined action already established on null.
I was doing that before I really knew what OO was. Maybe I should write a book. No, a doctoral Thesis, two degrees in advance.
-
[quote] The perfect gift for programmers who decide to quit using IFs Price: € 20.00 (+20% VAT) + Shipping Minimum quantity: 5 T-Shirts ... Quantity (one size) [/quote]
If (size != yourSize)
{ you_have_110€+_less = true;
you_are_fucked_up = true;
]:laugh: :laugh: EDIT: I just saw the slogan at the bottom of this part[^]: "Anti-If Campaign you can quit if you want to join us" :doh: :doh: :doh:
Regards. -------- M.D.V. ;) If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about? Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you Rating helpfull answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
modified on Monday, January 4, 2010 3:28 PM
Nelek wrote:
EDIT: I just saw the slogan at the bottom of this part[^]: "Anti-If Campaign you can quit if you want to join us"
That's actually a subtle NLP embedded command feed: "You can quit if" + "you want to join us".
-
Just in case you haven't noticed, there is an "anti-if campaign[^] out there. Now, I am thinking of starting an "anti-for" one; and "anti-switch" one; and - well you get the picture. Too bad anti-goto is an old news.
Unbelievably stupid! :wtf:
“Follow your bliss.” – Joseph Campbell
-
Just in case you haven't noticed, there is an "anti-if campaign[^] out there. Now, I am thinking of starting an "anti-for" one; and "anti-switch" one; and - well you get the picture. Too bad anti-goto is an old news.
-
Just in case you haven't noticed, there is an "anti-if campaign[^] out there. Now, I am thinking of starting an "anti-for" one; and "anti-switch" one; and - well you get the picture. Too bad anti-goto is an old news.
I love the statement that using if statements "reduces legibility". Yup, browsing through hundreds of polymorphic object definitions to try to find out wtf the code does is much easier. They're right, though -- why use a simple branching system, when a hideously complex, unreadable one will do?
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
-
Most developers have no understanding of Object Oriented programming beyond the text book definition. There are some great things you can do with correctly designed OO. One really neat pattern is the Null object pattern so instead of checking for null when you call a method you have a predefined action already established on null. But then I am a dreamer.
Need custom software developed? I do custom programming based primarily on MS tools with an emphasis on C# development and consulting. A man said to the universe: "Sir I exist!" "However," replied the universe, "The fact has not created in me A sense of obligation." --Stephen Crane
Despite all this looking like a joke, I agree too. I should add that most programmers do not have enough experience to realise how a complex state (like 10 boolean flags) can create an IF-ELSE hell, where one guy after another fixes one bug after another for a year, and still it never actually works... Just take a big "C" program (or a C++ program written by a C programmer)... :laugh:
-
I love the statement that using if statements "reduces legibility". Yup, browsing through hundreds of polymorphic object definitions to try to find out wtf the code does is much easier. They're right, though -- why use a simple branching system, when a hideously complex, unreadable one will do?
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
-
Most developers have no understanding of Object Oriented programming beyond the text book definition. There are some great things you can do with correctly designed OO. One really neat pattern is the Null object pattern so instead of checking for null when you call a method you have a predefined action already established on null. But then I am a dreamer.
Need custom software developed? I do custom programming based primarily on MS tools with an emphasis on C# development and consulting. A man said to the universe: "Sir I exist!" "However," replied the universe, "The fact has not created in me A sense of obligation." --Stephen Crane
i might get shot down for this but as I have been taught by 'books'. Is there a site/tutorial or recomended book to learn some of these things? Stephen
-
I love the statement that using if statements "reduces legibility". Yup, browsing through hundreds of polymorphic object definitions to try to find out wtf the code does is much easier. They're right, though -- why use a simple branching system, when a hideously complex, unreadable one will do?
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
You could use the same argument against separating code into functions so clearly something is wrong.
-
Most developers have no understanding of Object Oriented programming beyond the text book definition. There are some great things you can do with correctly designed OO. One really neat pattern is the Null object pattern so instead of checking for null when you call a method you have a predefined action already established on null. But then I am a dreamer.
Need custom software developed? I do custom programming based primarily on MS tools with an emphasis on C# development and consulting. A man said to the universe: "Sir I exist!" "However," replied the universe, "The fact has not created in me A sense of obligation." --Stephen Crane
Ennis Ray Lynch, Jr. wrote:
Most developers have no understanding of Object Oriented programming beyond the text book definition
But Anti-If is dealing with that problem like an Anti-AIDS-campain handing out free thermometers.
Personally, I love the idea that Raymond spends his nights posting bad regexs to mailing lists under the pseudonym of Jane Smith. He'd be like a super hero, only more nerdy and less useful. [Trevel]
| FoldWithUs! | sighist | µLaunch - program launcher for server core and hyper-v server
