A question for OOP experts. - page 12
You are missing trading opportunities:
- Free trading apps
- Over 8,000 signals for copying
- Economic news for exploring financial markets
Registration
Log in
You agree to website policy and terms of use
If you do not have an account, please register
Я!!! Made an awesome! no one wanted thing, in an awesome! no one wanted way.
An example was already given above - an error occurred, for some reason the variable is incorrectly modified. And the variable is accessed from a bunch of places in the program. How to catch a place where error ? With OOP encapsulation it's very simple - we put a breakpoint in the interface function that modifies the variable, and as soon as incorrect modification occurs - we stop and immediately, by the call hierarchy, see where the incorrect modification was made.And with your approach, Peter, we have to dig through all code, looking through all places where this variable is accessed, putting breakpoints everywhere and analyzing all calls, not only incorrect ones.
Well, actually, debuggers allow you to track variable changes, and stop in case of modification (I don't know about µl), but it's not an argument in general.
In general, I don't understand - why are you making such a big deal here? Peter, creating digital circuits, does the author think about the exact structure of operational amplifiers, logic elements? No, he simply takes ready-made blocks and uses them to build your computer, for example, to save you from having to manually power some circuits to turn it on; you have a simple button without any details. You can also take that computer and set up video surveillance, for example (without knowing anything at all about operational amplifiers). It's the same with coding - we create blocks with a simple interface, from which we again build blocks with a simple interface. This allows for constant complication without getting bogged down in details. And all sorts of language constructs make sure that we don't get into the object through the back end. I think you'll agree when you're sick of your own code and want to rewrite it all (strange that the desire hasn't arisen yet. I had the urge once a week in the beginning).
And don't try to create a hierarchy of everything from everything (I've been through this), it's not necessary at all (like this nonsense idea - all entities in a program must be related). And oop is not synonymous with polymorphism with virtual functions, which is the impression one gets from reading many books.
It's 2019... Surely over 500 years ago, someone was trolling Leonardo Da Vinci in a similar way. )))
Peter, what about the graphics engine? What news?
Peter, what about the graphics engine? What news?
New inventions cannot be assembled from someone else's blocks. If you always borrow someone else's, it will dominate and prevent you from inventing anything. There is the ambition of the developer, the inventor, the innovator, who needs to shield his or her field of work from others' ideas in order to create something new.
Well, then it's better to start with making your own electricity, your own computer, operating system and language, and that's where the engine comes in! The algorithm is interesting, but it may not be enough life.
Well, then it is better to start with self-generation of electricity, its own computer, operating system, language, and there already to write the engine! The algorithm is interesting, but it may not last a lifetime.
Life is definitely not enough. So, it's about choosing your own site. For me, it's a programming approach. Anything below (electricity, computer, language) is accepted. But the approach itself is my platform. Objective, to test the potential of the kernel-movement idea in software development. Macro-task is to come to software self-development. How realistic it is, I do not know, but through AI for sure is possible.
ZS. And don't let them think that if they don't need my work here, I've given up, cried and become a loser.)
New inventions cannot be assembled from someone else's blocks. If you always borrow someone else's, it will dominate and prevent you from inventing anything. There is the ambition of the developer, the inventor, the innovator, who needs to shield his or her field of work from other people's ideas in order to create something new.
What makes you say that? You need a dynamic array. Oops, you can't do that in c/s++. That is, when you increase the size, you must allocate a needed piece of memory, copy it from the old to the new location and free up the old space. So we start to describe everything digitally and get an output quite similar to std::vector, so what's the point of all this bumping if we already have all this? That's the point of libraries, not to make up the same bicycle over and over again.