meta user
network profile
| bio | website | weblogs.asp.net/avnerk |
|---|---|---|
| location | Israel | |
| age | ||
| visits | member for | 11 months |
| seen | 1 hour ago | |
| stats | profile views | 90 |
Tech-turtle, fond of C# and .NET but likes to venture out to forage elsewhere as well.
|
Jan 6 |
comment |
How to share common methods if objects have different roles? Could you give an example of some of those identical methods? Quite likely, the solution would be to extract those methods into a service class. |
|
Jan 2 |
revised |
Constants in C# Fixed grammar a bit. |
|
Dec 31 |
comment |
Why aren't user-defined operators more common? I disagree. Maths is a philisophical/scientific discipline. As such, the ability to express terse, concise ideas outweighs the (often serious) learning curve involved in learning a new language for each new branch. Programming languages are tools to enable people to write software, whether as hobby, for a living or as a sideline. As such, most of them should encourage clarity over terseness. Different goals, different tools. |
|
Dec 30 |
awarded | Good Answer |
|
Dec 29 |
awarded | Nice Answer |
|
Dec 29 |
comment |
Why aren't user-defined operators more common? There are some things that should be discouraged at the style/convention level, like single letter function names, yes. But I wouldn't go an make a language more complicated just to disallow it. But custom operators would be adding a feature to a language. |
|
Dec 29 |
comment |
Why aren't user-defined operators more common? As I mentioned at the end, some operators have universal recognizablity (such as the standard arithmentic symbols, bitwise shifts, AND/OR, and so forth), and so their terseness outweighs their opacity. But being able to define arbitrary operators seems to keep the worst of both worlds. |
|
Dec 29 |
answered | Why aren't user-defined operators more common? |
|
Dec 4 |
answered | Necessary Infrastructure for large project with many components communicating through IPCs |
|
Dec 4 |
answered | Why Open-Source Code? |
|
Nov 18 |
comment |
What is this code? It is not. C++/CLI is a lot less plumbing-heavy, and can be easily identified by references to managed objects using the Object^ notation. This is just COM classes with all the autogenerated stuff implictly mentioned. |
|
Nov 15 |
comment |
Is this possible to re-duplicate the hardware signal on Linux? Similar to unix.stackexchange.com/questions/25601/… |
|
Nov 3 |
comment |
Why do old programming languages continue to be revised? So if "enough people care about the older languages" is the reason, would you say your answer can be rephrased as "sentimental attachment to existing languages"? I'm not saying that pejoratively, just trying to understand your answer. |
|
Oct 20 |
answered | Switch or a Dictionary when assigning to new object |
|
Oct 15 |
comment |
Are long methods always bad? Help reduce code what? |
|
Oct 8 |
awarded | Guru |
|
Oct 6 |
awarded | Enthusiast |
|
Sep 29 |
answered | Is Web application a Web service? |
|
Sep 28 |
awarded | Good Answer |
|
Sep 27 |
awarded | Nice Answer |
