Why do I listen to my sleep coding self?
-
0 times. I've wished that interfaces could contain static methods so that T.someFunction could exist for generics (constrained to that interface), but that's a completely separate issue. (that can't work in C# of course) How is "static virtual" even a reasonable concept? No instance = no vptr = no dynamic dispatch.
-
I once coded a class function in C++ that calls realloc() or malloc(), based on whether "this" points to null. It then deletes this and returns This.
-
Not only that, it calls _msize() on the this pointer and checks against another size parameter for the realloc. The last member in the class was a 0-byte array, for which the _msize() of the pointer minus size of other class members gave the array size.
-
In bed last night, I dreamt a wonderful improvement to the design of some software I'm working on. It would clean it up, move the code into it's appropriate classes, make it all beautiful. So I have just coded it. Or at least, I coded 3/4 of it. That was the point when I thought "Hang on a moment, you can't have
abstract static
methods in C#". :doh: Bugger. Note to self: don't listen to me when I'm sleepy. Anyone else done this? Constructed a massive edifice of beautiful code in your mind, only to find when you have got sufficient caffeine in your system that it has a fatal, fundamental, flaw?Those who fail to learn history are doomed to repeat it. --- George Santayana (December 16, 1863 – September 26, 1952) Those who fail to clear history are doomed to explain it. --- OriginalGriff (February 24, 1959 – ∞)
If you are going tp code in your sleep then choose a language that will better match your fantasies.
-
very different from current implementations[^] :-D
**_Once you lose your pride the rest is easy.
I would agree with you but then we both would be wrong._**
The report of my death was an exaggeration - Mark Twain Simply Elegant Designs JimmyRopes Designs
I'm on-line therefore I am. JimmyRopesOh my, I've been Osmosian-rolled. :sigh:
You'll never get very far if all you do is follow instructions.
-
very different from current implementations[^] :-D
**_Once you lose your pride the rest is easy.
I would agree with you but then we both would be wrong._**
The report of my death was an exaggeration - Mark Twain Simply Elegant Designs JimmyRopes Designs
I'm on-line therefore I am. JimmyRopesMy anti-virus considered it as a trojan horse.
-
It's actually a reasonable concept if you allow static inheritance (i.e. static virtual in C# speak), and that's a really useful concept that is missing in C#. How many times have you had to create an instanced service class, even though it has no state (so should be static), because you can't have static members in an interface or virtual static members in a base class?
BobJanova wrote:
static inheritance (i.e. static virtual in C# speak), and that's a really useful concept that is missing in C#
Couldn't you use a singleton of some related class hierarchy that implements the "static" code?
We can program with only 1's, but if all you've got are zeros, you've got nothing.
-
If you are going tp code in your sleep then choose a language that will better match your fantasies.
As Gilbert & Sullivan put it (in Iolanthe), When you’re lying awake With a dismal headache, And repose is taboo’d by anxiety, I conceive you may use Any language you choose To indulge in, without impropriety;
-
In bed last night, I dreamt a wonderful improvement to the design of some software I'm working on. It would clean it up, move the code into it's appropriate classes, make it all beautiful. So I have just coded it. Or at least, I coded 3/4 of it. That was the point when I thought "Hang on a moment, you can't have
abstract static
methods in C#". :doh: Bugger. Note to self: don't listen to me when I'm sleepy. Anyone else done this? Constructed a massive edifice of beautiful code in your mind, only to find when you have got sufficient caffeine in your system that it has a fatal, fundamental, flaw?Those who fail to learn history are doomed to repeat it. --- George Santayana (December 16, 1863 – September 26, 1952) Those who fail to clear history are doomed to explain it. --- OriginalGriff (February 24, 1959 – ∞)
-
In bed last night, I dreamt a wonderful improvement to the design of some software I'm working on. It would clean it up, move the code into it's appropriate classes, make it all beautiful. So I have just coded it. Or at least, I coded 3/4 of it. That was the point when I thought "Hang on a moment, you can't have
abstract static
methods in C#". :doh: Bugger. Note to self: don't listen to me when I'm sleepy. Anyone else done this? Constructed a massive edifice of beautiful code in your mind, only to find when you have got sufficient caffeine in your system that it has a fatal, fundamental, flaw?Those who fail to learn history are doomed to repeat it. --- George Santayana (December 16, 1863 – September 26, 1952) Those who fail to clear history are doomed to explain it. --- OriginalGriff (February 24, 1959 – ∞)
if you need vacation/some time off ... well do what you want. I never really dreamed of something like this but I tend to think about "problems" while being close to sleep or exercising. In both cases those great ideas you have seems so good but turn out to be complete bullshit when thinking them through with enough oxygen in the right parts of my brain :D So the only advice I can give: better forget.
-
BobJanova wrote:
static inheritance (i.e. static virtual in C# speak), and that's a really useful concept that is missing in C#
Couldn't you use a singleton of some related class hierarchy that implements the "static" code?
We can program with only 1's, but if all you've got are zeros, you've got nothing.