NET runtime in an environment that's fundamentally not compatible with the general. That said, I think that much of this complaint likely comes down to using a. that is directly encouraging something that is considered bad practice. Yes, it's to keep things brief and simple, but nonetheless. And on the topic of "encouragement", stuff like the tutorials often encourage people who are learning to do stuff like make things public. ![]() If nothing else, Unity has a heck of a lot of globally accessible stuff, and taking advantage of that global accessibility is often the easy way to do things. I think it's a debatable point, at the very least. So, long story short, a lot of people say this, because there are a lot of people online that could use more programming experience. There are shortcomings, but if they can't live with that, they need to grow up and get more experience. Unity has surprisingly clean API, and fairly good documentation. "our codebase is a big hangar made out of poop, with more poop propped up to support it, and painted to look good from distance". I think those people need to get more experience, and more experience with real world problems, that fall into category where, as my friend aptly described the thing the is working with. My opinion is that a person accusing unity itself - the whole engine - of being responsible for bad programming practices. In a few years he'll maybe get there, but right now complete disregard of all the things he errorneously hold sacred causes him experience horror. Thsi guy is in love with idioms and "the right ways to do it", stuck in it, and fails to realize the real world "get stuff done" issues. Support for polymorphism? Why is it even suppsoed to be a good thing?Īpi Discoverability? We have documentation, try reading it. C# is second class citizen in C++ engine, and alternative would be spawning bazillion interfaces like "IBeginHandler", etc, which would be garbage, as you'll have to essentually write a method name twice (first in interface implementation, then in actual method). Hacky api? Well, that's result of compromises made for performance. NET itself might be phased out, how far into the future is he planning to look. He hasn't reached this point where you figure out that you are not some mythical programming wizard, or voodoo shaman, or whatever else, but you're an auto mechanic with your hands covered in grease all the way to the shoulder.įuture proof? Games have 2 years releaase cycle. This dude - in your reddit here - isn't there yet. The reality is programming is dirty and unelegant, no practice should be used in all circumstances (even stuff like "never use goto" has exceptions), and it is REALLY, REALLY, REALLY important to concentrate on "make best solution in shortest amount of time, smallest amount of effort, smallest ongiong cost and get paid for it". So, they can delude themselves into thinking that they're doing something useful by constant refactoring, while in reality 98% of their work would be a waste of time. The thing here is, if the programmer is still in the honeymoon phase with their language and programming in general and the wisdom of ideas like "programmer's job is to get things done" haven't yet dawned upon them, their head will be full of ideas like "proper way" to do something, "idiomatic way" to do something, etc, or worse, they'd be looking for "beauty" in their code, believe in "code smell" and such. ![]() Meaning it is hacky, it is not perfectly suitable, but this is what the have and can use right now. NET/C# provides very few tools for tackling timely resource deallocation, for example, and rather than being "proper" language, C# in unity is used for scripting. ![]() NET background teachs you specific programming habits (object immutability, anyone), that in unity would result in a poor performance. Click to expand.The guy in the first thread you linked is an idiot.Īlright, maybe it is too harsh and maybe he is not an idiot, but his problem is "coming from.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |