Comments by "Ozzy Perez" (@OzzyTheGiant) on "ThePrimeTime"
channel.
-
87
-
49
-
44
-
25
-
16
-
15
-
13
-
12
-
12
-
11
-
8
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
You and me both! The only way I can win the battles is by forcing Class components where possible, using a sensible state management system (no Contexts, I don't want giant component trees looking like bird wings), separating concerns as much as possible, keeping components small, and organizing code in functional components so that variables are the top, followed by closure functions (functions that don't need the outer scope get tossed out of the component or in another file), then effects, then any logic for data transformation, and finally the render. People need to learn standards, for god's sakes!
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
JS Kiddies, buckle up, I'm gonna tell you my honest opinion about PHP and why I like it:
- PHP > Python and JS: Its syntax is just easier to read. Yes people hate the $ but honestly it points out variables more quickly
- PHP is arguably the fastest of all the interpreted languages. According to TechEmpower benchmarks, raw PHP is almost as fast as C++
- I like that PHP is multiparadigm but it leans in favor of OOP, especially from 7.4 onwards. You can pass around functions (defined as Closures) and you can pass in higher scoped variables into said Closures, but the syntax is not as convenient as JS, which is fine because it's a lot easier to define static functions for a class and pass those around or call them instead; I think this leads to cleaner, more readable, organized code. Namespacing is a big thing part of that.
- PHP now has Fibers, the equivalent of Python threads and JS workers, so I don't see any reason these two have any advantage over PHP here.
- There is no reason to use the templating syntax that PHP comes with out of the box. You can just use Twig, which is a common template language in other ecosystems.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
15:57 - Absolute trash, soy, L take
On another note, I'm really glad we are talking about this, just based on the content and the Twitch comments I saw. I feel like this is something that all of us as developers need to balance out well, the choice of what language to use based on what we like vs what gets the job done.
For example, I don't like using Java. I don't hate Java itself (it's really come a long way and paired with Kotlin it's nice), but I just don't like the ecosystem around it (using XML for configs, hard to read docs for so many things, Spring/Hibernate is a nightmare). That said, the devs that have been in that side of the web dev field don't care about your petty feelings and they will continue to use Java because it's efficient for them and it works well for their use cases. I still won't use Java but if that ever has to be a project requirement, if I have leverage, I could at least advocate for a stack that works well for what I want, like: JOOQ query builder, Koin dependency injection, Javalin framework, and use Kotlin where I can.
Rather than choosing stacks because we like them or because they're popular, we should be choosing stacks that make us feel productive. Go is such a language for that. That's why my default stack now is Go (back end), TS/Svelte (front end), and Dart/Flutter (mobile, desktop, cross-platform), maybe Python if machine learning is involved.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
On the "making life" conversation, agreed. I know a lot of us don't wanna go down that rabbit hole because we're not religious, and indeed this is a conversation that on some level requires talking about religion, but as a person that IS religious, we do have to look at the fact that we simply can't create life, we can only reproduce life from pre-existing life in accordance to current laws of science. For the ones that make the argument that we have already created life with synthetic cells, all that proved is that the complexity it took to create such cells required intervention by another person. This is in line with the fact that our biological substances, such as DNA, proteins, and enzymes, can't exist without each other, pointing to the fact that something had to have put them together to be able to coordinate and create new cells. For me at least, that points to the requirement of someone intervening to make life possible.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@ThePrimeTime there's a few problems with implementing this take. To be competitive with job hunting, you need to know more than one language. Most of the jobs are in JS, Python, Java, C++ and so forth. From there, some of these languages I don't really like working with, I much prefer Dart, Go, and Kotlin, but the opportunities to work with these languages (or just one's preferred ones) can be so low that you're forced to follow the industry, even if you try advocating for using newer languages. So the point is, in this industry, unless you adhere to JS, Python, Java, or C++, you can't become a master on the language you want to work with. It always ends up about being adaptible to what the jobs give you vs being allowed to work with what you want.
Also, this is a good take, but the writer can be a real scumbag. He's the type of person who insults people for using TS instead of JS for no good reason even though TS has clearly become the better approach to writing code faster and with less bugs.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Regarding the apple prerogative, in an ideal world, everyone uses the same "system" and develops for the same hardware and it's all efficient (unless you need a specialized computer for a very specific use case). That said, I have vehemently opposed apple's walled-garden approach for many reasons that go beyond development:
- They overprice their products, which means if they ever get 100% control of the market, lower-income families have less access to tech resources.
- The way they build their computers is without the ability for us to repair them ourselves.
- To build apps for their system, we are forced to buy their hardware. Not unlike Windows were they have first-class frameworks (Win UI 3, WPF, etc.) but we can build with Python and friends, download directly and install without having to go through a store.
- Most importantly, because of this prestige that they portray through their marketing, they are promoting a cultist attitude where if you don't own apple products, you are inferior.
For these reasons, I oppose apple, and it would be better to force them to change their walled-garden policy.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1