So you took content that doesn't belong to you, distorted the audio, and added noisy background music, unrelated screenshots of code, and super annoying subscribe animations?
You have to out of your way to make code that dependant on itself. I can unstand changing a structure or class causing some issues as the functions using them are dependent on their structure but still.
The curse of highly-coupled code, inter-connected code, or highly-dependent code. When I first learned coding (on my own?) in highschool, there was a lot of "spaghetti" and cowboy coding (if it works, good enough). It took my instructors my first year of programming courses in university to get that out of my system, and teach me how to design code properly. They focused on code design, and not specifically specific languages. So now I'm amazed when I see my old, terrible techniques being used by my peers, or "examples" they find on the internet, and wonder if they ever took a programming course that taught code design.
If the bad code is the only code you can have in the current circumstances, it is not a bad code, it's the only code you can have. Simply, stop touching it.
You can very simply avoid all of that using a fine grained suite of tests before you even start to write a single line of code. But of course, this will take time, so people will rather not do it. At least not until their first spaghetti code project goes live. Some wi learn from the latter experience some won't.
I think this is flirting with overengineering 😅 I love writing tests as I go too, but trying to write them all up front sounds like a return to Waterfall.
@pdgiddie It may seem that way at first, if you don't want to think about it any further. But no, that is by no means what it means. It means moving into a digital world in which people are not held back by bugs purely for cost reasons. Because every bug means a thousandfold loss of human working time and, above all, life time. Every bug means pointless patches, pointless pondering about why it doesn't actually work now, and, as already mentioned, thousands of times over (if that number isn't far too low). Is the developer world already so indoctrinated by spreadsheets that it no longer wants to perceive the true effects of its actions?
@@Waldemar_la_Tendresse Yeah, I agree tests are essential. I just don't think they can _all_ be written up-front. Maybe one or two to start getting the desired API drafted, but a lot of discovery happens whilst the code is being written, so there's generally a dance between the code and the tests, with both evolving side-by-side.
@pdgiddie Even if it was exaggerated in my first statement, that's exactly what I'm talking about. I'm even leaning towards an initial throwaway version without testing and great bug fixing to get a better understanding of the issues up front. The second version is always the best. So specifically: 1. quick and dirty throwaway version for problem detection 2. tests per component 3. component 4. back to 2, sometimes with another 1 in between
Funny thing is, everything that UB us talking about is currently the common experience with all code that is 'borrowing' FOS libraries from public repos - All code today is fragile, very fragile.
Bad code is code containing "Egyptian Dancers" all along. Kill that phenomenon by placing your matching braces in the same column: your code becomes readable... Ah, and of cource application of the NEUTiC-rule: Never Ever Use Tabs in Code! Never ever...
@@divinecomedian2 Simple reason: there's still a debate going on whether tabs sould cover 8 spaces ("THE SACRED STANDARD") or 4 or whatever. Even a great mind mentioned 3.14 in this respect. The worst is a combination of both tabs AND spaces. No, to me its just spaces: they're unambiguous.
Seems you do not have rights to the original videos as the voice is modulated and video is interrupted with some random code images...
It's fine
They sped up the video and that's why sounds weird.
but yeah they just stole the clips from another video and added random extra stuff
So you took content that doesn't belong to you, distorted the audio, and added noisy background music, unrelated screenshots of code, and super annoying subscribe animations?
It's uncle Bob so it's only fitting
It's fine. I wouldn't have watched this video otherwise.
Classes should be thought of as "types" not "containers." Define a new "type" (if you need it). Don't try to "bundle" code.
Ditch the music.
this is how they steal the original video. The YT algorithm won't be able to match it with the original material
Haters music is fine
You have to out of your way to make code that dependant on itself. I can unstand changing a structure or class causing some issues as the functions using them are dependent on their structure but still.
What is difference between coupling and fragility?
The curse of highly-coupled code, inter-connected code, or highly-dependent code.
When I first learned coding (on my own?) in highschool, there was a lot of "spaghetti" and cowboy coding (if it works, good enough).
It took my instructors my first year of programming courses in university to get that out of my system, and teach me how to design code properly. They focused on code design, and not specifically specific languages.
So now I'm amazed when I see my old, terrible techniques being used by my peers, or "examples" they find on the internet, and wonder if they ever took a programming course that taught code design.
I love this video! 😂 learning with humour
Bad code is code that is hard to modify, it's that simple.
If the bad code is the only code you can have in the current circumstances, it is not a bad code, it's the only code you can have. Simply, stop touching it.
You can very simply avoid all of that using a fine grained suite of tests before you even start to write a single line of code. But of course, this will take time, so people will rather not do it. At least not until their first spaghetti code project goes live. Some wi learn from the latter experience some won't.
I think this is flirting with overengineering 😅 I love writing tests as I go too, but trying to write them all up front sounds like a return to Waterfall.
@pdgiddie
It may seem that way at first, if you don't want to think about it any further. But no, that is by no means what it means. It means moving into a digital world in which people are not held back by bugs purely for cost reasons. Because every bug means a thousandfold loss of human working time and, above all, life time. Every bug means pointless patches, pointless pondering about why it doesn't actually work now, and, as already mentioned, thousands of times over (if that number isn't far too low). Is the developer world already so indoctrinated by spreadsheets that it no longer wants to perceive the true effects of its actions?
@@Waldemar_la_Tendresse Yeah, I agree tests are essential. I just don't think they can _all_ be written up-front. Maybe one or two to start getting the desired API drafted, but a lot of discovery happens whilst the code is being written, so there's generally a dance between the code and the tests, with both evolving side-by-side.
@pdgiddie
Even if it was exaggerated in my first statement, that's exactly what I'm talking about. I'm even leaning towards an initial throwaway version without testing and great bug fixing to get a better understanding of the issues up front. The second version is always the best. So specifically:
1. quick and dirty throwaway version for problem detection
2. tests per component
3. component
4. back to 2, sometimes with another 1 in between
I was waiting for the immobility and viscosity discussion…
Rust devs in Linux.
Horrible. Reported
Huh?
Funny thing is, everything that UB us talking about is currently the common experience with all code that is 'borrowing' FOS libraries from public repos - All code today is fragile, very fragile.
You seriously need to stop with fucking up the audio on these videos
Bad code is code containing "Egyptian Dancers" all along. Kill that phenomenon by placing your matching braces in the same column: your code becomes readable...
Ah, and of cource application of the NEUTiC-rule: Never Ever Use Tabs in Code! Never ever...
What if you're coding in Python?
Everyone seems to love K&R braces,I hate it, so much harder to see where blocks start and end.
Tabs are great. Still not sure why some folks don't like them.
@@divinecomedian2 Simple reason: there's still a debate going on whether tabs sould cover 8 spaces ("THE SACRED STANDARD") or 4 or whatever. Even a great mind mentioned 3.14 in this respect.
The worst is a combination of both tabs AND spaces.
No, to me its just spaces: they're unambiguous.
1. Made in Java
Java stands for an island and a dead horse.