Thread: Points Base

Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 63
  1. #21  
    Registered Member
    Andys1814's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    974
    Thanks given
    688
    Thanks received
    455
    Rep Power
    727
    Quote Originally Posted by Lumiere View Post
    Talk about defying logic..
    Um okay I shouldn't of said it like that but I guess it'd be better to say "even when it makes more sense to name it as a constant."

    Thanks for ur concern lol
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2. Thankful user:


  3. #22  
    Donator

    Jason's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    6,092
    Thanks given
    2,402
    Thanks received
    2,823
    Rep Power
    4550
    Quote Originally Posted by Andys1814 View Post
    The "explicit list of conventions" mentions nothing about "well if it's TECHNICALLY immutable..." It simply states that if it is a constant, then it will follow NAMING_LIKE_THIS.

    Also, I am not sure what you mean by programming isn't comparable to math. Programming is math, (or at least should be considered a branch of it). There is a reason that at most schools, Computer Science or Programming classes are in the math department and require a certain level of Math to enroll in. Programming involves algorithms, data structures, and mathematical functions which model real world math.

    Additionally, I think it's noteworthy that for stuff that is "technically mutable," the ways by which they are mutated are completely unnatural programming designs which require the coder to go to extreme measures to mutate it.

    I will agree with you that my argument is based on personal preference and my example is negligible but the examples that you always provide are just as negligible. But your arguments are based on these "laws" of programming that you make up in your head and feel like you need to use 100% time even when it defies logic.
    Unfortunately there is no conversation to be had here that in any way will progress either of us.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. Thankful user:


  5. #23  
    Theory Wins?
    Greyfield's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Age
    32
    Posts
    1,585
    Thanks given
    61
    Thanks received
    265
    Rep Power
    310
    Quote Originally Posted by Jason View Post
    Unfortunately there is no conversation to be had here that in any will progress either of us.
    OT and completely random, but there was a time where I respected you years ago, but over the past two years you've really become one of the stereotypical elitists that are the reason these forums have been unbearable for the past few years; no offense intended.



    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. Thankful users:


  7. #24  
    Donator

    Jason's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    6,092
    Thanks given
    2,402
    Thanks received
    2,823
    Rep Power
    4550
    Quote Originally Posted by Greyfield View Post
    OT and completely random, but there was a time where I respected you years ago, but over the past two years you've really become one of the stereotypical elitists that are the reason these forums have been unbearable for the past few years; no offense intended.
    No offence taken, everyone is entitled to their own opinion.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. Thankful user:


  9. #25  
    Renown Programmer & Respected Member

    Ryley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    596
    Thanks given
    254
    Thanks received
    521
    Rep Power
    1332
    Quote Originally Posted by Andys1814 View Post
    The "explicit list of conventions" mentions nothing about "well if it's TECHNICALLY immutable..." It simply states that if it is a constant, then it will follow NAMING_LIKE_THIS.

    Also, I am not sure what you mean by programming isn't comparable to math. Programming is math, (or at least should be considered a branch of it). There is a reason that at most schools, Computer Science or Programming classes are in the math department and require a certain level of Math to enroll in. Programming involves algorithms, data structures, and mathematical functions which model real world math.

    Additionally, I think it's noteworthy that for stuff that is "technically mutable," the ways by which they are mutated are completely unnatural programming designs which require the coder to go to extreme measures to mutate it.

    I will agree with you that my argument is based on personal preference and my example is negligible but the examples that you always provide are just as negligible. But your arguments are based on these "laws" of programming that you make up in your head and feel like you need to use 100% time even when it defies logic.
    "Technically mutable" ??? If it's mutable, it's mutable. If it's immutable, it's immutable. Simple. There are no "technicalities".

    As far as your ignorance goes, the following statement is 100% false: "Additionally, I think it's noteworthy that for stuff that is "technically mutable," the ways by which they are mutated are completely unnatural programming designs which require the coder to go to extreme measures to mutate it."

    I've seen the following example occur in real-world code and it was never a case of "unnatural programming" or "extreme measures of mutation"

    Code:
    class Constants {
        Point SOME_CONSTANT_POINT = new Point(5, 5);
    }
    
    // ... omitted ...
    
    Point point = Constants.SOME_CONSTANT_POINT;
    point.x += 5;
    addComponent(component, point);
    
    // ... omitted ...
    This is a valid and real example and it's native (java.awt.Point). Debugging the later use of SOME_CONSTANT_POINT which would cause other components to be offset took some unnecessary time simply because the use of the "technically immutable" convention was taken for granted.

    But ya know, you're right cos a constant in math is precisely the same in computer science cos you say it is.


    Quote Originally Posted by Greyfield View Post
    OT and completely random, but there was a time where I respected you years ago, but over the past two years you've really become one of the stereotypical elitists that are the reason these forums have been unbearable for the past few years; no offense intended.
    Rofl ok, cos spreading knowledge, constructive criticism and good advice for free means he is an elitist A+

    Maybe if the ignorant jack off above wouldn't be so opinionated their debate maybe would have gone somewhere productive
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. Thankful users:


  11. #26  
    Ex Rune-Scaper

    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    3,534
    Thanks given
    457
    Thanks received
    1,257
    Rep Power
    990
    Quote Originally Posted by Andys1814 View Post
    others like Seven post on so many threads about "technical immutability" and how constants should be named.
    Because you should follow the standard naming conventions of that particular language. There's a reason why they have this.

    Naming conventions make programs more understandable by making them easier to read. They can also give information about the function of the identifier-for example, whether it's a constant, package, or class-which can be helpful in understanding the code.


    Code Conventions for the Java Programming Language: 9. Naming Conventions
    Reply With Quote  
     

  12. Thankful users:


  13. #27  
    Registered Member
    Andys1814's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    974
    Thanks given
    688
    Thanks received
    455
    Rep Power
    727
    I don't see how you can come and talk about these topics as if you are talking about facts. It's literally personal preference and me and Jason were actually having a reasonable argument, I'm not sure how my statements make me ignorant.

    You love to talk about these conventions that java has regarding the naming of constants, but I have yet to see any list of constants that testifies to your viewpoint and not testify to mine. There is a reason they are vague and open to interpretation.


    But ya know, your personal preference is a matter of fact because you say it is, and everyone will agree with you because of your rank.


    Quote Originally Posted by Freyr View Post
    Because you should follow the standard naming conventions of that particular language. There's a reason why they have this.





    Code Conventions for the Java Programming Language: 9. Naming Conventions
    I definitely agree with you on this. But my argument was based on the fact that a lot of people on here love to flash around the "technical mutability" argument, which I personally disagree with. I think it should be named like a constant if it will not change ever, regardless of if it CAN change. According to ryley, that makes me ignorant.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  14. Thankful users:


  15. #28  
    Renown Programmer & Respected Member

    Ryley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    596
    Thanks given
    254
    Thanks received
    521
    Rep Power
    1332
    Quote Originally Posted by Andys1814 View Post
    I don't see how you can come and talk about these topics as if you are talking about facts. It's literally personal preference and me and Jason were actually having a reasonable argument, I'm not sure how my statements make me ignorant.

    You love to talk about these conventions that java has regarding the naming of constants, but I have yet to see any list of constants that testifies to your viewpoint and not testify to mine. There is a reason they are vague and open to interpretation.


    But ya know, your personal preference is a matter of fact because you say it is, and everyone will agree with you because of your rank.




    I definitely agree with you on this. But my argument was based on the fact that a lot of people on here love to flash around the "technical mutability" argument, which I personally disagree with. I think it should be named like a constant if it will not change ever, regardless of if it will change. According to ryley, that makes me ignorant.
    I AM talking about facts. I even provided an example which proves the bullshit you claim as "technically mutable" false.

    Read: https://www.rune-server.ee/runescape...tter-java.html

    I called you ignorant because you have never even bothered to look for code conventions or bothered to understand why people tell you that "technical mutability" is wrong. Refer to the thread, the outdated image above and my example to understand why it's against convention and for good reason.

    My rank means nothing, I don't see why that's always the scapegoat with people. I've made contributions to this site which the other programmers found meaningful/good/useful/otherwise and nominated me for this rank. THAT'S IT. Has nothing to do with the nonsense I post on this site and shouldn't be held against me. I'm human. I'm not always right.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  16. Thankful user:


  17. #29  
    Registered Member
    Andys1814's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    974
    Thanks given
    688
    Thanks received
    455
    Rep Power
    727
    Quote Originally Posted by Ryley View Post
    I AM talking about facts. I even provided an example which proves the bullshit you claim as "technically mutable" false.

    Read: https://www.rune-server.ee/runescape...tter-java.html

    I called you ignorant because you have never even bothered to look for code conventions or bothered to understand why people tell you that "technical mutability" is wrong. Refer to the thread, the outdated image above and my example to understand why it's against convention and for good reason.

    My rank means nothing, I don't see why that's always the scapegoat with people. I've made contributions to this site which the other programmers found meaningful/good/useful/otherwise and nominated me for this rank. THAT'S IT. Has nothing to do with the nonsense I post on this site and shouldn't be held against me. I'm human. I'm not always right.
    I wasn't scapegoating you for your rank in the way you think I was, nor was I insinuating that you don't deserve it or even that you are 100% wrong in this argument.

    However -- your rank does make you hard to argue with. Crowd mentality kicks in and everybody pits themself against me.

    Anyway, I'll read the document you linked but like I said I haven't seen a post that testifies to your very specific viewpoint.

    My viewpoint will not change and I know that yours won't either so as Jason said, there is no real discussion to be had here.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  18. Thankful users:


  19. #30  
    Theory Wins?
    Greyfield's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Age
    32
    Posts
    1,585
    Thanks given
    61
    Thanks received
    265
    Rep Power
    310
    Quote Originally Posted by Ryley View Post
    "Technically mutable" ??? If it's mutable, it's mutable. If it's immutable, it's immutable. Simple. There are no "technicalities".

    As far as your ignorance goes, the following statement is 100% false: "Additionally, I think it's noteworthy that for stuff that is "technically mutable," the ways by which they are mutated are completely unnatural programming designs which require the coder to go to extreme measures to mutate it."

    I've seen the following example occur in real-world code and it was never a case of "unnatural programming" or "extreme measures of mutation"

    Code:
    class Constants {
        Point SOME_CONSTANT_POINT = new Point(5, 5);
    }
    
    // ... omitted ...
    
    Point point = Constants.SOME_CONSTANT_POINT;
    point.x += 5;
    addComponent(component, point);
    
    // ... omitted ...
    This is a valid and real example and it's native (java.awt.Point). Debugging the later use of SOME_CONSTANT_POINT which would cause other components to be offset took some unnecessary time simply because the use of the "technically immutable" convention was taken for granted.

    But ya know, you're right cos a constant in math is precisely the same in computer science cos you say it is.




    Rofl ok, cos spreading knowledge, constructive criticism and good advice for free means he is an elitist A+

    Maybe if the ignorant jack off above wouldn't be so opinionated their debate maybe would have gone somewhere productive
    It's a biased opinion either which way you go and when it comes down to it no one gives two shits about anyone's opinion. No one said anything about if the advice/criticism he's giving is acceptable or not, so that point is irrelevant.

    Someone could give world class knowledge, but it's how you come across giving it that character opinions come from. But as I said, they're all opinions, no one gives two shits about them A+



    Reply With Quote  
     

Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast

Thread Information
Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)


User Tag List

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 37
    Last Post: 06-28-2014, 12:33 PM
  2. [BASE] User Titles. (e.g loyalty point things)
    By Robin Spud in forum Tutorials
    Replies: 29
    Last Post: 12-31-2011, 12:34 AM
  3. Replies: 45
    Last Post: 05-02-2011, 06:06 PM
  4. in-game highscores based on points
    By Oxygen in forum Help
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 05-06-2009, 05:37 PM
  5. [HUGE] Charecter based sig (C) [HUGE]
    By Looted in forum Tutorials
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 05-20-2007, 05:23 PM
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •