Reputation
8,018
Top tag
Next privilege 10,000 Rep.
Access moderator tools
Badges
1 23 43
Newest
 Revival
Impact
~444k people reached

Apr
12
awarded  Revival
Mar
14
comment What is programming like in the Japanese language?
@Panzercrisis, that depends on the whims and policies of the developer or team. As I mentioned in my answer, my wife's code tends to use English words in declarations, but she might use the words differently than I would typically interpret them. I don't think there's any one pattern that's dominant. But I'd bet that a developer who is only familiar with the Japanese word for a concept would use that rather than resorting to a dictionary.
Feb
23
awarded  Nice Answer
Nov
5
awarded  Yearling
Feb
27
comment Is ORM an Anti-Pattern?
I don't think I've ever advocating using an ORM to pretend that you've got a magical object store that doesn't require you to understand how the database work. I said precisely the opposite: If you understand object-oriented programming well AND how databases work, an ORM can help you produce more maintainable code.
Feb
27
comment Is ORM an Anti-Pattern?
I am not sure what you mean by that. Your comment doesn't make much sense to me.
Jan
16
revised What is programming like in the Japanese language?
added 96 characters in body
Dec
1
comment Should I use automatic properties?
@ThomasEding, the code may look the same, but the CLR bytecode signature won't, so if your external client isn't in the same assembly you'd have to re-compile the client.
Nov
5
awarded  Yearling
Jul
28
awarded  Good Answer
Mar
25
awarded  Nice Question
Mar
25
awarded  Notable Question
Feb
18
awarded  Nice Answer
Nov
30
awarded  Necromancer
Nov
15
comment Should UTF-16 be considered harmful?
There's nothing complicated about transforming between UTF32 and UTF8, and it's only a tiny bit complicated to transform between UTF16 and UTF32. The code to do so reliably was included in the Unicode standard since at least 2.0 or so.
Nov
15
comment Should UTF-16 be considered harmful?
I think you haven't read the standards document. That's the closest thing there is to a guarantee. It says: "UCS-4. UCS-4 stands for “Universal Character Set coded in 4 octets.” It is now treated sim- ply as a synonym for UTF-32, and is considered the canonical form for representation of characters in 10646." unicode.org/versions/Unicode6.2.0/appC.pdf
Nov
15
comment Should UTF-16 be considered harmful?
@Eonil, UTF-32 will only ever be distinguishable from UCS4 if we have a Unicode standard that features something like a UCS5 or larger.
Nov
8
awarded  Enlightened
Nov
6
awarded  Nice Answer
Nov
5
awarded  Yearling