Comments by "yapdog" (@yapdog) on "ThePrimeTime" channel.

  1. Wait--I'm supposed to hate PHP now? 🤨
    2
  2.  @insu_na  Sounds interesting. I'd done some research years ago, but I'll take another look. Thanx for the info 👍
    2
  3. yeah, i'm thinking the same
    2
  4.  @simonfarre4907  Iteration should be used wherever possible, but recursion can't be escaped in some situations where you need to see how a series of values change per-call. You could simulate it with your own stack on non-branching recursion, but if you have multiple branches of recursion (as I do) where functions call other functions that may loop back and/or to other looping functions which may or may not loop back or elsewhere and so on, you'll quickly see the value of just using recursion.
    2
  5. You didn't actually get dunked on, Prime. You said that language paradigms are not tools. The professor agrees with you.
    2
  6. I loved this discussion. I'm developing an OS for creators (which includes devs, btw). It includes an editor/IDE... fully customizable. (i.e. any language can be used to modify it, even languages you create) All of these features are so easy to add and manage by anyone. I'll hit you up when we're in beta, Prime
    2
  7. "The Lord's Language" Yep. That should be trademarked by C.
    2
  8. Yep. Software does, indeed, suck. Believe it or not, for nearly 2 decades, I've been working on a solution for all of this sh!t. ALL of it.
    2
  9. Jonathan Blow is a blowhard. Sure, he knows some stuff, but he tends to overblow everything.
    2
  10. There is no such thing as an obsolete language. As long as you can create software that performs as you need it to, anyone who tells you that your language is obsolete can go fvck themselves. Take that from a C coder of 3 decades who's coded some of the most complex CG software and architectures.
    2
  11. On threading, I really don't understand this idea that writing them in C is inherently harder. If you know how to do it, it's easy. If you don't, it's hard. That goes for any construct in any language.
    2
  12. As with all things that will be affected by (re)Generative AI, there'll be a lot less opportunities out there, as the barriers for entry will be raised higher every coming year. Why? Did you notice the "(re)" that I placed in front of "Generative"? These tools don't really generate anything. They're used to regurgitate--with variance--existing data. They're not intelligent in the least. However, in order for them to continue to be useful, they require new data. Only those who're truly capable will be able to provide that data, and thus their value will increase... but only after this sugar rush period with (re)Generative AI subsides.
    2
  13. Dude... you're the a lovechild of Dr. Disrespect and Gilbert Gottfried 😅 Anyway, I've been watching your vids for a li'l bit, and you've become one of my goto channels. So.... SUBSCRIBED!
    1
  14. Is AI the end of programmers? Not if I have anything to say about it! And I do. Seriously, I've had enough of this tech-bro-driven BS where they have no regard for average people just trying to make an honest living.🤬🤬🤬
    1
  15. I love NULL pointers. But I agree with the arrays converted to pointers issue. I created my own libraries to deal with this. And I've developed a coding environment that obviates the need for worries over bounds checking: the code is constructed from components that can't move beyond boundaries, even when type casting. That's what developing in C for 30 years can get you when you don't accept the problems as-is, running to other languages in the hopes that the problems would be solved by others. (<--- that was directed at those who've accused me of "missing out" on the features in more modern languages. I've created my own language, taking into account the features in others)
    1
  16. 3:36 "... Why didn't'cha lead with that?!" 🤣🤣🤣
    1
  17. I carry rotten eggs in my bag for just such an occasion.....
    1
  18. I will not now, nor will I ever, call square root "squaret"
    1
  19. 7:25 👈Prime spittin' mad truth right there! That should be on a t-shirt
    1
  20. Thanx for covering this. We'd been tussling with this since I build my our server software, complete with built-in database. Initially, have to run it on machines that I can access until it's proven. The plan was to migrate to AWS. But then, after we spent a lot of time reviewing the plan, we'd started questioning the wisdom of that. This article, and you coverage of it, provides more data that we can use to make our final decisions. 👍
    1
  21. Nah. If a JS kid is happy doing non-challenging webdev, then they're where they belong. Cream rises to the top.
    1
  22.  @insu_na  🤔 What makes them so great, tho?
    1
  23. googie analytics???? EDIT: yep. obviously fake in the code.
    1
  24. My mom used to program in COBOL, too. And on my dev platform, I'll be adding COBAL (a modified version) to allow her to repurpose the language.
    1
  25. Nah. I with Christoph on this one.
    1
  26.  @bitwize  I don't have UAF problems in my code. I have my own C API which prevents such problems. As far as "undefined behaviors", you'll have to be more specific since that's a generic term. Further, to what does BO refer to, body odor? 🤨
    1
  27. 😅!
    1
  28. It all depends on what you're developing. Some things require a greater context to see the problem. For example, I've been developing a platform for developing languages. The problems that arise simply cannot be easily identified by using a debugger, especially since much of it is multibranch recursion hell. I have to actually print out the construct hierarchy with named enums and such.
    1
  29. 10:30 ::jeeeezus::...... Look, I understand the need to point out undefined behavior in C. Every single one of these "C IS BAD!!! diatribes points the same thing. And every single one of those cases are things no good C programmer would do. Anyway.... whatever...... ::sigh::........
    1
  30. How could a grown-ass man push this crap??? I'm not as old as that dude, but I was around in the earliest days of HTML. HTML is bullsh!t designed to replace actual designers. As such, it absolutely sucks for anything but typing in basic, basic, unformatted text by engineers (i.e. non-graphic designers). Graphic designers needed more. That's why CSS became necessary. That's why JavvaScript is necessary. So, yeah.... HTML is sooooo great........
    1
  31.  @Asto508  What do you mean?
    1
  32.  @mesticq8165  Fighing? Nah. Just having a conversation. But you are, indeed, right 👍
    1
  33. Honestly? I tend to find it very difficult to read other peoples' code, too. More often than not, when I'm seeing something that doesn't make sense I tend to doubt my own self. But then when I look deeper, I sometimes see that the code is not well written... IMHO. For example, I recently experienced this with regex engines. I had to chuck everything I found--even in popular open source release code--and just start from scratch, ignoring everything else. It was a coding slog, but it was faster and less painful than banging my head against the wall until the nonsensical made sense.
    1
  34. For companies, it's not just about being more "caring" about their products. They'll be held accountable by their customers. Also, there could be greater consequences for them if such an exploit came to light in their widely-used software, exposing (government) systems and user data.
    1
  35.  @xenoduck3189  Not quite. I can't release details just yet, but we're looking at Q3 for official announcements. That may seem so far away, but I've been developing this platform for many years; to me, it seems like the announcements are next week!😱
    1
  36. Checking #1 reveals you. Not in a good way.
    1
  37. All this says is that JavaScript is a f#cked up language that should never have been created.
    1
  38. Using LLMs for coding is lunacy. We just haven't realized that yet
    1
  39. 8:53 Truth. For years I had longs defined in the dynamic types on my application platform/OS. I just never thought much about them. The system is adaptive, so the size isn't an issue. However, longs always require 'deviant' code since there is no agreed-upon size for them. So, "Removal of longs" is on my TODO list for my platform. No big loss.
    1
  40. Of course, linked lists are trees. WTF is that even a question? 🤨 In any case, there are cases where I use "redundancy" where I use linked lists that are also arrays. Sure, it requires more management, but I hide the complexity so I can do pushes, pops, inserts, direct element accesses, and link traversal.
    1
  41. Those curly braces are the correct way to code. I'm sick and tired of the IDEs assuming otherwise 🤬
    1
  42. 10:26 I write readable code. I've been told so by those who've had to continue development on code I've left behind. However, it's f#cking hard work. For example, I have a code block convention where each block is marked with single-line, right-justified comment. <---that's right, I said right justified. That means you have to be a persnickety cuss with tabs & spaces. I am that (old) guy. And that s but one convention that I employ. Why do I do this? I'm used to working on large projects where I often have to go back and read and understand my own code.
    1
  43. I created my own regex engine that's not susceptible to that kind of error. This classic test regex from Rexegg: "^(A+)*B" With that pattern, a string as simple as "AAAAAAAAAAC" would require 3,584 steps. But a string with 100 A's followed by 1 C would cause a catastrophic backtracking failure, requiring 4,436,777,100,798,802,905,238,461,218,816 steps. Those numbers scared the sh!t out of me!😱 And if they don't scare you, then you haven't been paying attention. I finally just dumped all the standard regex models and built one completely from scratch (yes, in C😛). My engine significantly reduces the amount of backtracking: the 100 A string is resolved in just 1295 steps. 😁😁😁I'm still benchmarking it, but this engine is incredibly promising.........🤞
    1
  44.  @JohnDoe-yx4hi  As I stated, "^(A+)*B" is a pattern from Rexegg, and you'll find similar patterns on other regex sites, e.g. Mozilla. Yes, these are deliberately bad patterns designed for the purpose of demonstrating how engines can fail with catastrophic backtracking. This is a security issue. So, if you're designing a regex engine and you're not testing for "bad" patterns, then you shouldn't be developing a regex engine at all. Not if you intend for it to be used by others.
    1
  45.  @JohnDoe-yx4hi  I'd responded to you twice, and my comment was deleted both times. Have no idea why. Let me just say that that pattern is deliberately bad for the purposes of building a robust/secure regex engine.
    1
  46. I've been coding for over 3 decades and can honestly say that I've never found it "fun." I code to solve problems. Coding isn't fun. Reaping the benefits of all that hard work is fun.
    1
  47. JS frameworks are abstractions. And they're built on top of abstractions on top of abstractions..... I actually am not a fan of webdev for this reason.
    1
  48. 14:30 Looking at you, webdev
    1