>>818658
>Directly instancing an object is too 1990, you need a AbstractSingletonProxyFactoryBean, of course.
Nice low hanging fruit. Your 'joke' is outdated. Everybody and their cat knows about Java's antipatterns. You're not bringing anything new to the table.
>Speaking of degeneracy, we can't forget about the most degenerate community in the whole software development ecosystem: Javascript.
Why are you trying to shoot yourself in the foot?
>I remember a comic I saw that was just a long series of complaints about issues one faces when developing using javascript. Callbacks are bad, prototyping inheritance is ugly, I stubbed my toe, woe is me! And pretty much everything on that list was simply a result of ineptitude with the tools provided (just don't nest callbacks) or refusing to use less elegant solutions (stop trying to use js's broken OOP and write procedural code).
<I remember a comic I saw that was just a long series of complaints about issues one faces when developing using Java. Over-abstraction is bad, wrapping everything in getter/setters is ugly, I stubbed my toe, woe is me! And pretty much everything on that list was simply a result of ineptitude with the tools provided (just don't abstract everything) or refusing to use less elegant solutions (stop doing getter/setter wrappers and create public members).
Also,
>muh js oop is too HAAAAAAAAARRRRDDD
Try to learn prototype-based inheritance on the language you mainly use sometime.
>flocks to the tools because it caters to bad developers, such as python, but that's a different topic.
Nice non-argument. Using Python is as easy as using Javascript without the braindead stdlib of Javascript.
>code is not documentation.
That's where you're wrong, kiddo. Code might just as well be the documentation, if you write it well. Documentation also doesn't have to be in a separate PDF book to be worthy of reading. If you are documenting your functions, the code file with properly commented functions might be just as well as doc/every_function_plus_kitchen_sink_handwritten_cuz_i_am_a_fucking_retard.txt.
Documentation != tutorial. If you're writing documentation, the code is fine. If you're writing tutorials, you will need that PDF.
>But hey, you can be sure they are COMMITTED to making fatties feel accepted.
Good luck getting this printed.
skipping the repeat of rust coc bullshit everybody knows
>If your final product just uses the same language, you are not actually doing anything you wouldn't be able to do with the original language to begin with.
What the fuck? The transpiled language is made to abstract over the bad parts of the first language, not to "do more".
>All you are doing is writing code that less people understand, since is just a niche language for people who like pointless efforts.
Not an argument. Every language is niche in the beginning. Why wouldn't people adopt it if it has a clear advantage?
>They argued that one can write assembly manually, completely ignoring that you can't just open ACTUAL assembly on a text editor and hack away. Even asm has to be compiled into an executable.
This is completely incoherent.