Your extremely great loss there, mate.
And the unlimited distance/dimension remote orderer. Thankfully, AE interfaces with LP properly, from what I've seen via the mod spotlight, so people can mix and match as required.
Computer Craft recipes, overpowered?
- Thread starter ollie299792458
- Start date
-
The FTB Forum is now read-only, and is here as an archive. To participate in our community discussions, please join our Discord! https://ftb.team/discord
Your extremely great loss there, mate.
I acknowledge your point of view as being valid, even as I strongly disagree with it.
So it is written, so it shall be. So say we all.
Now that we've got that settled, let's agree with that in regards to ComputerCraft as well before I am forced to set the turtles after you lot.
...And will happen again.
And THAT is why the use of the GOTO command is frowned upon!
Goto persists in modern programming. For C and C++, you probably should still be using it for unifying error handling situations when interacting with legacy APIs. There isn't a good way to unify error handling in a way that captures local scope without a lot of repetition (if only in filling out the function signature).
And if you think GOTO is Considered Harmful, then proceed to hide under your desk and cower at the existence of continuations.
Well, I was referring to GOTO, not goto.
The only language I can think of that capitalizes core syntax like that is Basic. I think.I was about to ask why you couldn't just use exception handling, but then I noticed the word legacy.
Well, I was referring to GOTO, not goto.
I was about to ask why you couldn't just use exception handling, but then I noticed the word legacy.
And also checked exceptions are, politely, the dumbest idea ever. And also all languages that use the C++/java exception handling mode are inherently broken, brittle, uncomposable, and impossible to design around cleanly. And also we solved this problem in 1991 with Common Lisp's conditions and restarts. And also Haskell's Exception monad solves all the problems with exceptions. And also JVM based exception handling CAN be made sane as evidenced by alt-jvm contenders like slingshot for clojure.
But hey, who really thinks about this nerd stuff anyways? "I am just too busy getting stuff done!" return -1; seems like a pretty legit way to signal an error, amirite?
I did start using GOTO (and stopped using, at the same time) whilst programming BASIC, so sure, let's call it that, eh?
It's all about how it's used, or often is the case, not used when control flow really needs to be done with looping instead of gotoing or subbing.
But eh, it's already been hammered into the masses that the GOTO statement kicks babies, eats dogs, and whatnot.
If we're going to go that route, I'd say we just define rand as four (4), and be done with it. All of that silliness in regards to trying to find random numbers, pff! Problem solved.
A lot of people (myself included) don't like exceptions.
I'll quote Go's designers on this:
GCC's coding standards disallow exceptions. The Linux kernel is in C, so exceptions don't exist. LibPNG uses setjmp for critical error handling.
The current Linux kernel has over 100,000 instances of "goto" in it.
Well they're basically the same thing aren't they?
"Try" is basically a setjmp and "catch" is the address.
It's just different from the programmer point of view.
Personally I'm fine with exceptions to handle critical errors.
I'd rather have an exception that 50 if(function()==-1) return -1; to return to somewhere where I finally say to the user "Something went very wrong".
"Try" is basically a setjmp and "catch" is the address.
It's just different from the programmer point of view.
Personally I'm fine with exceptions to handle critical errors.
I'd rather have an exception that 50 if(function()==-1) return -1; to return to somewhere where I finally say to the user "Something went very wrong".
You know, GOTO is also present in nearly every single program ever made...
It just so happens that languages more recent tend to use it after compilation.
As for why it's been hammered that "GOTO is evil", it boils down to the fact that a large majority of people misuse them, causing more troubles than what it is supposed to solve.
Why use GOTO where you could make a function? a "switch case"?
Goto has its uses, but most of us will never really need it.
Just like we don't need to fiddle with addresses when using "high end" languages. We can, but it's just that there are other ways around, and they are usually more optimised than what your every day dev usually does.
Which is why I did not say they were doing this. Mod Mods are not an uncommon thing. Personally the turtle specialization right now is the only thing keeping it from being completely over powered. Which is while I dislike that turtles can do everything i still over all think CC is a fairly good mod.
But it would not shock me if some 3rd party out there does not add something to change that.
There is this drive in modded MC that seems to be going for trying to make survival play as close to creative play as possible. And while yes many of us like to do things the hard way for the sport of it there are many that don't like hard play styles at all and just want to be creative while not actually using creative mode. I am not saying the GROUP OVER ALL as you suggest I am. You have seen the threads and been on this forum long enough to see there is a fair number of people that do want easy mod play even to the point of not knowing what to do. We have players that have burned out because LOL they already made the Mater fab and have 5 billion UU mater WHAT DO? And can not even come up with an idea of what to do on their own. And when anything is suggested they shot it down as to hard or to repetitive. But we also have many people that build wonderfuly creative things posting them in places like the Show your base and What does your power room look like.
But this is a thread about options on the CC mod an my post is my personal view on the mod as it stands. And if your want my honest option. The mod is great but I believe many of the users are pastebin users that don't want to spend the time to learn basic coding skills and are using CC because it is actually easier then using a quarry if you can just pastbin the code down.
The real theoretical problem with GOTO is that only very specific uses of it are composable, and it's very easily to deviate from that path. It's a lot like how lockless algorithms are in principle possible to write by hand, but very few people have the discipline necessary to accomplish that reliably.
Of course, most of the software development world is comfortable writing code with poor composability, so I guess we should count our blessings that this message managed to penetrate into the industry. Still I have hope: even the icky, nearly intractable and yet maddeningly arrogant Javascript language has closed-over-lambdas and higher order functions, so I like to believe progress is being made.[DOUBLEPOST=1364589146][/DOUBLEPOST]
These people receive ample punishment for their behavior: they are themselves. Wish no further ill upon them, it's already pretty cruddy.
At lest its an honest replay. You got to give the man credit that he can agree and disagree with you at the same time. Unlike someone else that might just keep telling you that your wrong.[DOUBLEPOST=1364589377][/DOUBLEPOST]
If you really want to think about it. All object ordinated code is basically a fancy way to wrap GOTO into a single command. Everything you call a command from a library your both storing local variables, preforming a goto, and a return command.