▲ 244 ▼ Anon died on the "clang format bad" hill (thelemmy.club) submitted 19 hours ago by danhab99@programming.dev to c/programmer_humor@programming.dev 292 comments fedilink hide all child comments Mine is that the useState hook is an actual plague on the entire React ecosystem. Regardless of your opinions of React, if you wanna use something then use it right.
[–] portnull@lemmy.dbzer0.com 13 points 7 hours ago (5 children) Functional is better than object orientated programming permalink fedilink source hideshow 5 child comments replies: [–] marcos@lemmy.world 2 points 3 hours ago (1 child) There's nothing in Functional Programming that stops you from writing in an Object Oriented idiom... permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] portnull@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 point 3 minutes ago There are no objects in a pure functional language. No mutable types. Could you give an example of what you mean please? permalink fedilink source parent [–] ThirdConsul@lemmy.zip 5 points 4 hours ago (1 child) Could you define what you mean by functional and ooo in practice, because to many people in pracitce functionsl is a garbage monad wrapper over anything with unreadable, undebugable code whose only purpose is to hide if else statements... and it doesn't even do that; while ooo is java factory of factoties mixed with aspect programming and 20 levels of inheritance. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] wewbull@feddit.uk 2 points 3 hours ago Not Op but.. OO languages have classes with inheritance based polymorphism. I don't see struts + methods as enough to qualify. Functional languages have functions which can take functions as arguments and function composition as first class features. permalink fedilink source parent [–] NoLemurs@lemmy.world 2 points 5 hours ago 100% agreed, though I'm in the "neither is ideal" camp. My favorite language, by a long way at this point is Rust. It's not functional, but borrows a lot of functional idioms while avoiding the pain points functional language usually hit in exchange for losing the purity of functional languages. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] marcos@lemmy.world 2 points 3 hours ago (1 child) There's nothing in Functional Programming that stops you from writing in an Object Oriented idiom... permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] portnull@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 point 3 minutes ago There are no objects in a pure functional language. No mutable types. Could you give an example of what you mean please? permalink fedilink source parent
[–] portnull@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 point 3 minutes ago There are no objects in a pure functional language. No mutable types. Could you give an example of what you mean please? permalink fedilink source parent
[–] ThirdConsul@lemmy.zip 5 points 4 hours ago (1 child) Could you define what you mean by functional and ooo in practice, because to many people in pracitce functionsl is a garbage monad wrapper over anything with unreadable, undebugable code whose only purpose is to hide if else statements... and it doesn't even do that; while ooo is java factory of factoties mixed with aspect programming and 20 levels of inheritance. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] wewbull@feddit.uk 2 points 3 hours ago Not Op but.. OO languages have classes with inheritance based polymorphism. I don't see struts + methods as enough to qualify. Functional languages have functions which can take functions as arguments and function composition as first class features. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] wewbull@feddit.uk 2 points 3 hours ago Not Op but.. OO languages have classes with inheritance based polymorphism. I don't see struts + methods as enough to qualify. Functional languages have functions which can take functions as arguments and function composition as first class features. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] NoLemurs@lemmy.world 2 points 5 hours ago 100% agreed, though I'm in the "neither is ideal" camp. My favorite language, by a long way at this point is Rust. It's not functional, but borrows a lot of functional idioms while avoiding the pain points functional language usually hit in exchange for losing the purity of functional languages. permalink fedilink source parent