Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Zelda103

Thank you Cheapshot

Recommended Posts

"Absolute Scum". Also you might be thinking of the yogscast when you say three of me since the technic team is just one puppet account of the yogscast designed to troll flowerchild. I'm actually simon, diggy diggy! Jaffa time!

No more faffing about!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Absolute Scum". Also you might be thinking of the yogscast when you say three of me since the technic team is just one puppet account of the yogscast designed to troll flowerchild. I'm actually simon, diggy diggy! Jaffa time!

:w00t:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's been happening pretty much since 1.0 was released I think. Just notch being utterly retarded again (thankfully he will no longer have that opportunity!). I can only hope the bukkit team will finally get that fixed, since smp is their thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, Notch's amazing programming skills, man...

I love it when he writes code like this:

if (x == 0 && y <= 6.0F)

{

  if (x == 0)

  {

    ...

It's almost like each of his hands codes independently, and doesn't tell the other hand what it's doing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Holy bajeebus. I knew MC code was horrible but I never could have hoped that it's worse than the 10 year old legacy winCE stuff I've been beating back to life for past year o_O

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As someone who is not at one with the sacred code i cant immediately see whats wrong with it. is it just the its redundant and full of white space, or is there something deeper?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As someone who is not at one with the sacred code i cant immediately see whats wrong with it. is it just the its redundant and full of white space, or is there something deeper?

Mostly the redundancy part. It just shows a general lack of understanding when it comes to programming in general, which inevitably gave way to a program that wasn't optimized at all, and it prone to crashes and bugs because the little things weren't done completely right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Generally I see that kind of redundant code coming from college freshmen who have written their first ever programs, some hardheads need maybe a couple of months to evolve further from that.

Main problem with the code is that gets incredibly hard to maintain and error-prone. That specific example isn't too bad performance-wise as it's comparing integers but I wouldn't be surprised if there are other cases where they call some expensive functions in similar ways.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Generally I see that kind of redundant code coming from college freshmen who have written their first ever programs, some hardheads need maybe a couple of months to evolve further from that.

Main problem with the code is that gets incredibly hard to maintain and error-prone. That specific example isn't too bad performance-wise as it's comparing integers but I wouldn't be surprised if there are other cases where they call some expensive functions in similar ways.

Exactly. Shit goes south when you start calling entire high-level functions in this manner

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, Notch's amazing programming skills, man...

I love it when he writes code like this:

if (x == 0 && y <= 6.0F)

{

  if (x == 0)

  {

    ...

It's almost like each of his hands codes independently, and doesn't tell the other hand what it's doing.

actually... blame java. My friend is experienced in java and he admits to having to do this. it's a glitch with conditionals, and it happens only rarely, so an "if" inside another "if" may be because it needs to check twice before execution.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not a "glitch", it has to do with implementing algorithms and using logic, and not using your brain at the same time:

if (a &&  {

   Point 1 //boolean statement 'a' is guaranteed TRUE here!

   if(a) {

     Point 2

   }

   Point 3

}[/code]


can be rewritten as


[code]if (a &&  {

   Point 1

   Point 2

   Point 3

}[/code]

So there's never a reason to do this.

This is assuming you don't change boolean [i]a [/i]within the first conditional, of course (where Point 1 would be)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Only way for the "glitch" to happen is to write multi-threaded code and do it wrong. If he isn't writing multi-threaded stuff then he simply seems to be clueless and possibly ignoring side effects on the conditionals.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Which is why you never ever ever EVER fucking EVER should write code like this:

if (--x > 0)

if ( x = y == null )

z [ p ++ ] . foo ( p )

It's just too difficult to guarantee you have every tiny bit of the order-of-operations correct, and it is way too unreadable. As far as I'm concerned, no matter how good a programmer you are, and no matter how vital of a project you are working on, if you can't write readable code, you shouldn't be coding.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...