Car newcar = initcar()

car newcar = initcar()

Other urls found in this thread:

vulkan-tutorial.com/Introduction
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

?

Car newCar = new Car(Color.Blue, 2017, CarMake.Lamborghini);

Initialize car as datatype string

Set car value as Mclaren

Output car

Am i coding nao?????

Aaaaand this is why Java is retarded.

you're psudocoding! you've practically earned a degree!

I wish I was lying :(

delete newcar;

heh, nothing personnel kid

No, you are retarded

He's well prepared for a job as a manager at IBM or as an author of computer "science" textbooks

No, YOU'RE retarded!

That isn't even how you Java.
Car newCar = new Car("Blue",2017,"Lamborghini");

while (true) {
newCar = new Car();
}

>I will spend my entire life writing shitty CRUD apps instead of doing cool shit like AI
Wew lad, computer science sure is useless!

oop really is trash
>Dog extends Mammal lmao am i coding yet?

Pff. Poo Poo Java bullshit. Being limited by the constructor is fucking poor. This is how you do in a real language:

Car newCar = new Car {Color = Colors.FaggyPurple, Model="VW Beetle"};

What is wrong with it?

>objects
>real language

car = makeCar(‘Blue’, 2017, ‘Lamborghini’);

Get back to me when you've found a high-paying job using your shitty (((functional))) special snowflake language.

i actually program in java constantly, doesn't mean i have to like it

var car := Car{
Color: "Blue",
Model: "Saab"
}


no go coesn't have enums, only constant strings, ints or other primitives

i wish it did tho

>what are enums
if you do enums as strings I feel bad for you son

i fell ya brotha

C, Vulkan style

CrCarCreateInfo car_info = {
.sType = CR_STRUCTURE_TYPE_CAR_CREATE_INFO,
.color = CR_CAR_COLOR_BLUE,
.model = CR_CAR_BRAND_SAAB,
};
CrCar car;
crCrateCar( &car_info, &car );

auto car {std::make_shared()};

import car
print car

Where did you learn vulkan?

What is Go good at? Where is it used most?

Their documentation is pretty good:
vulkan-tutorial.com/Introduction
Network protocols and mid/low-level communications.

internal class Car
{
public string Color { get; set; }
public int Year { get; set; }
public string Make { get; set; }
}

internal class Program
{
private static IEnumerable Red2017LamborghiniProperties
{
get
{
yield return ("Color", Color.Red.Name);
yield return ("Year", DateTimeOffset.FromUnixTimeMilliseconds(1483228800000).DateTime.Year);
yield return ("Make", nameof(Red2017LamborghiniProperties).Substring(7, 11));
}
}

private static void Main(string[] args)
{
var sweetAssCar = new Car();

Red2017LamborghiniProperties
.ToList()
.ForEach(pv => sweetAssCar
.GetType()
.GetProperty(pv.Item1, BindingFlags.Public | BindingFlags.Instance)
.SetValue(sweetAssCar, pv.Item2));

Console.WriteLine(sweetAssCar.Color);
Console.WriteLine(sweetAssCar.Year);
Console.WriteLine(sweetAssCar.Make);
}
}

OP op = new OP();
std::cout

No you're not supposed to do this because you can pass in any string you want. Could be "Blue" or "Nigger" or anything else and that wont work so you use enums to limit the options to those intended.

let car = Car::new();

auto* car = (CCar*)malloc(sizeof(CCar));
return car;

Stutter. I should say Car ONCE. The language should know that since this is a Car, it should look in the Car namespace first, where Blue and Lamborghini are. This is such an incredibly common use case that it should be accommodated.

Car

car := Car{}

struct car *newcar = (*struct car) malloc(sizeof(struct car));

init_car(newcar);
uninit_car(newcar);
free(newcar);


wow so much better!

do not cast the returned value of malloc
do not use sizeof(type) unless necessary

car = malloc(sizeof *car);

you do cast the returned value of malloc or else

all you're doing there is introducing another source of truth. you're writing more only to yield less robust code.

stop opening the door to bugs.

You don't know what you're talked about, what if Car was an interface, and your concrete class was a mustang? Or Chevy?

i think the general consensus is cast it in c++ and don't cast in c

class Car:
def __init__(self, make, model, colour):
self.make = make
self.model = model
self.colour = colour

Car1 = Car(Honda, Odyssey, Red)

Isn't python wonderful?

my DM is a bit rusty

/obj/item/machinery/vehicle/car
var/name = "car"
var/model
var/color

/obj/item/machinery/vehicle/car/new()
..()
self.name = "Sweet Ride"

var/car = new /obj/item/machinery/vehicle/car

Aaaaaaaaaaand you should go back to redit

i just had that very example in my OOP class at uni
i had the worst lecturer out of the entire uni that didn't even explain me why or when i should use OOP stuff

(let ((car (get-car)))
...)

Hey Thats pretty good

auto car = car::make();[/code[[

I really wish OOP meme would just die

String car = "I'm a fucking car";

>That Car class and constructor
looks like the exact same shit I did for a CS project this semester.

You reading Python Crash Course too?

my $car = bless {
make => $make,
model => $model,
color => $color
}, Car;

car newCar = new car(car.New) {color = car.colors.red};

I think I tried to do this earlier with Python. I was trying to make a family tree simulation where you had parents and then their children all saved under a class entitled "Man." An instance of the class was randomly created when the conditions for at least two parents were true (married, under certain age).

But I do not know how classes work, so I couldn't figure out how to instantiate them properly. OP's text is the closest analogue to what I came up with.

I code in PHP all the time and I want to kill myself.

case class Color(val c: String) extends AnyVal
case class ModelYear(val y: Int) extends AnyVal
case class CarMake(val m: String) extends AnyVal

var car = Car(Color("Blue"), ModelYear(2017), CarMake("Lamborghini"))

>tfw you realize that Sup Forums's finest technology board can only argue about most basic logic and syntax because they don't really know anything else

needs more factories desu senpai

This is the best way to do it.

car Car = Car.builder()
.withColor(Car.Color.WHITE)
.withMake("Nissan")
.withModel("Cube")
.withYear(2015)
.build()

>antipattern
triggered

>builder
>from gang of 4
>antipattern
???

#define true false

>OOP example uses a car analogy

>blue lamborghini
bad taste

You are starting to understand the internet in general, everything is entry-level discussions because that's the only thing that gets (You)s going.

Simple. For statically dispatch, do it as I said. For dynamic dispatch, require explicit notation.

It's complete shit but mad props

const car = composeCar(
color(blue),
make(lamborghini)
)();

I disagree. I have seen discussions with insights from professionals who have clearly been there, with verifiable people with 20-30 years experience backing them up.

car := NewCar()

type Colour = [Char]
type Make = [Char]
type Model = [Char]
type Year = Int

data Car = Car {colour: Colour, make: Make, model: Model, year: Year}
jalopy = Car "blue" "Ford" "Capri" 1969

>he trusts the gang of 4

yeah except for having to implicitly reference self

I think I'm too autistic for analogies, they never help me understand new concepts which is what they're supposed to do. I mean, you can't just spawn a car out of thing air by typing a line of code. Why not use an actual example from a computer program?

@Autowired
private Car car;

Any tips for learning Haskell/functional programming in general?

>DM
>not Clown Car

You don't unless you're a scientist or mathematician.

Car car = new Ford()

We python3 now
class Car(object):
def __init__(self, make: Make, model: Model, colour: Colour) -> None:
self.make = make
self.model = model
self.colour = colour

Car1: Car = Car(Honda, Odyssey, Red)

enum CAR_MANUFACTURERS = {
CHEVROLET,
CHRYSLER,
FORD,
MAZDA,
HONDA
}

class Car {
pieceOfShit: boolean;
}

let car = new Car()

for(i=1;i

>colour

Car car = Initialize("MakeCar");