The Official First World Problems Thread™
-
They are irrelevant and NDAd
-
boss? coworker? the elders of the internet?
-
They're in a class of people likely to be subject to NDA...
-
I think I can do this too:
I the prob is thing where north sideways animals.
-
This whole string of posts makes no sense.
Maybe we're being ed here.
-
I the prob is thing where north sideways animals.
I assume this is a concern so specialized that I cannot sympathize with it. Now I have another first world problem.
-
Real sentences spotted!
-
Where?
-
anyone has a @xaade - English dictionary?
-
-
No, this guy makes @xaade seem positively coherent.
-
I can only provide so much detail, I work under NDA. Take my sentence and find the beardiest programmer you know and see what they can make of it for you.
-
Take my sentence and find the beardiest programmer you know and see what they can make of it for you.
I'm the beardiest programmer I know you insensitive clod!
-
if we find a doll. would you point in it were they touched you?
-
I can only provide so much detail
Which, apparently, is none. Just complete gibberish.
-
Can we have a thread for BRIC problems?
-
Using staples where nightgown.
-
-
Okay, so let's say I had, entirely hypothetically, specified a Filter<Foo> that is FooFilter, and got instead of an interface FooFilter implements Filter<Foo> I got a concrete FooFilter /** every possible way to want to filter. But they did throw in an abstract class, not sure why...
This is I believe quite definitively a first world problem.
-
Who is "they"?
Also, I'm not even entirely sure that's a problem. What's the problem? You don't like interfaces?
-
Hi, thanks for showing up, the sheer obtuseness of this thread had me wanting someone to verbally abuse. So, I see that you as well can't think the 4 seconds necessary to figure out what class of people writing software I have been involved in the design of might be under NDA, and why it therefore doesn't matter who they are nor can it. It's also pretty clear that this problem is in fact 0th world.
-
These two are the only relevant posts.
@Gribnit said:They're discarding the separations carefully extracted from the problem space and embodied in the initial interface specifications! They seem to think the abstract notion is meant to be embodied by a single concrete class!
discarding specifications - they're ignoring [person's] designs
from problem space - redundant
embodied in the initial interface specifications - redundant, in [person's] designs
abstract notion - abstract class (see below)
single concrete class - misusing inheritanceOkay, so let's say I had, entirely hypothetically, specified a Filter<Foo> that is FooFilter, and got instead of an interface FooFilter implements Filter<Foo> I got a concrete FooFilter /** every possible way to want to filter. But they did throw in an abstract class, not sure why...
wanted
Filter<Foo> : IFooFilter
got
FooFilter : Filter<Foo>
frompublic abstract Filter<Foo>
But it's all slightly irrelevant as a first world problem.
No this isn't a sock puppet of mine.
-
I am indeed not a sock puppet of yours. I do not write Objective-C style examples.
-
So, I see that you as well can't think the 4 seconds necessary to figure out what class of people writing software I have been involved in the design of might be under NDA, and why it therefore doesn't matter who they are nor can it.
Their relationship to you matters. If "they" is someone on the other side of the country working on code you'll never see, then who gives a fuck? If "they" is your boss or co-workers, than maybe that's an issue.
It's also pretty clear that this problem is in fact 0th world.
What problem? "They" added an interface?
-
C#, but anyway
You do seem to think similar to me.
-
No. Have you used the notion of a Filter<V>? The biggest problem is that I only have thin channels through which to apply a boot to their ass. Where I expected an interface, maybe an abstract, and a few to a dozen concretes, I got, a useless abstract and a single monolithic concrete. I assume you will defend this coding style to the death, because you are an idiot when it comes to software design, but that's beside the point...
-
Their relationship to you matters. If "they" is someone on the other side of the country working on code you'll never see, then who gives a fuck? If "they" is your boss or co-workers, than maybe that's an issue.
He's thinking literally.
So when you ask him who, he doesn't think in terms of relation, but the actual who, which he can't disclose.
-
So, I see that you as well can't think the 4 seconds necessary to figure out what class of people writing software I have been involved in the design of might be under NDA, and why it therefore doesn't matter who they are nor can it
If you can't provide enough detail for this to make sense, then don't say anything.
-
Ah I see.
I call it "the God class"
And blakeyrat isn't defending anything, because he's got a batshit clue as to what you're saying.
-
The problem is as far as I can tell able to exist in the space of sense I am legally and practically able to provide for it to exist in, so now I have yet another FWP...
-
I just don't know what's going on around here any more. Can someone ELI5?
-
-
This is I believe quite definitively a first world problem.
To the extent that software is only developed in the first world? Maybe this is all about outsourcing to the third world? Not every WTF qualifies as a FWP.
-
-
He's ranting.
He doesn't want to make sense.
It would help if his jargon was consistent, or at least using the formal definitions.
But no, he's even made up definitions for words, so I have no basis to understand it.
-
I'm refusing to provide redundant detail that I have already provided, folks are pretending like they don't understand or can't easily extrapolate it. I would explain it this way to a five year old too..
-
No. Have you used the notion of a Filter<V>?
Depends on what that is. I've never used anything by the name " Filter<V>". That I recall.
The biggest problem is that I only have thin channels through which to apply a boot to their ass.
Right but since "they" are lava men from below the Earth, who cares? We still don't know the relationship between "they" and you, so statements like this are meaningless.
Where I expected an interface, maybe an abstract, and a few to a dozen concretes, I got, a useless abstract and a single monolithic concrete.
You should be introduced to better programming languages.
I assume you will defend this coding style to the death, because you are an idiot when it comes to software design, but that's beside the point...
What is the point?!
-
And a 5 year old would go and walk off to play with legos.
-
That seems an appropriate response to a first or fewer world problem, I do not object and would consider the transaction concluded.
-
-
Oh, GOD, I'm annoying.
-
Nah, man, they really are trying to screw up this impl, it's like watching a monkey fuck a stump.
-
And now there's a point. I will now recede into @xaade's subconscious until he needs to be reminded again..
-
cries in a corner and rocks back and forth
the voices, the voices, the voices, the voices, the voices, the voices
-
it gives me a david lynch feeling. you think you're understanding it, and then suddenly "No hay banda"
-
He's thinking literally.
G-d knows, Blakey can relate to thinking literally.
I wanted to read your post as "laterally" and had to force myself to read it the right way. Not sure why.
-
-
I'm refusing to provide redundant detail that I have already provided, folks are pretending like they don't understand or can't easily extrapolate it. I would explain it this way to a five year old too..
EACH INTERFACE IS ACTUALLY FOUR SEPARATE INTERFACES OCCURRING SIMULTANEOUSLY!
-
@Lorne_Kates said:
EACH INTERFACE IS ACTUALLY FOUR SEPARATE INTERFACES OCCURRING SIMULTANEOUSLY!
There are three physical gateways and the three are one.
-
I can only provide so much detail, I work under NDA.
Most of us work under an NDA. If you really can't provide any more than incoherent gibberish, then don't bother posting.