Car car = new Car();
Car car = new Car();
System.gc();
dumb frogposter
struct car car = create_car();
>frog post
doesn't
Car car;
make an instance of Car named car?
Poo poo = new DesignateShittingStreet().PooInit()
not initialised tho
let car = Car make model in
...
Old* New = new Old();
wow java is shit
on c++ it calls the default constructor, same as doing
Car car();
Car car = new CarFactory.createCarFromXML('cardata.xml').translate().transpose().getCompiledCarData().asCar();
This is how you do it lads. Take notes.
var car = new Car();
It's almost like C++ copied C and Java didn't.
auto car = std::make_unique();
>getCompiledCarData().asCar()
what for?
auto car {Car()}
That's not the same, that is actually a function declaration.
Except for the shitty syntax, you mean?
even Java lets you do
var car = new Car();
these days
struct car car;
car_init(&car);
int car = 0;
var i : Int
Fuck you, Rust, Go, Scala and Kotlin.
New old = new Old();
With lombok you could always do that, tho.
App::Objects::Car *cCar = GetObjectFactorySingleton()->GetCarFactory()->CreateCar(CAR_MAKE_FORD, CAR_MODEL_MUSTANG, 2017, true, false, true, true, 0, CAR_DAMAGE_NONE);
cCar->InitializeCar(CAR_INIT_ALL);
GetObjectList()->Add(cCar, OBJECT_TYPE_CAR);
Why doesnt the factory call init and add?
I know that feel. All that FUCKING boilerplate and for what? A half-assed language.
Why is the make and model an enum and not an object queried from app::findCarMake("Ford").findModel("Mustang")?
>Cannot assign instance of type New to type Old
It's an upcast because all old things were once new
App::Objects::Cars::Year2017::Ford::Mustang *fmcVehicle = GetObjectFactorySingleton()->GetCarFactory(new App::Objects::Cars::Year2017::FordCars::Mustang::Body(App::FileHandling::XML::LoadConfig("c:\Users\user\Desktop\Cars\fmc2017.xml"))->CreateCar(true, false, true, true, 0, CAR_DAMAGE_ALL)->get_instance()->public_ptr();
fmcVehicle->InitializeCar(CAR_INIT_ALL);
if (false == GetObjectList()->Add(fmcVehicle, OBJECT_TYPE_CAR_2017_FORD_MUSTANG))
{
printf("Fuck you.\n");
exit(0);
}
(define automobile1 (make ))
Can't use "car" since it's a reserved name in Scheme.
OOP is extremely powerful because it feels natural to humans, even if academics screech all the time against it.
>POO
other way around, academia loves oop
it seems repetitive however you could replace the second "Car" by something that inherit from "Car" like this :
Car car = new NiggerCar();
@autowired
Private CarFactory carFactory;
Why in God's name would you want to do that though? Explicit is always better.
Ask the guy who wrote it 5 years ago who also quit 2 years ago.
seems familiar for some reason
It was made to make Lambdas less painful to work with
No. Academics loves to suck dick on FP.
which one you prefer?
this...
System.Text.StringBuilder name = new System.Text.Stringbuilder();
or this...
var name = new System.Text.StringBuilder();
>aplication freezes for .5 seconds
ArrayList car = new ArrayList()
depends on the context, but yes it may be a function named car with no parameters that returns a Car object, or it may be a stack variable named car of type Car