Programmer Humor

32558 readers

526 users here now

Post funny things about programming here! (Or just rant about your favourite programming language.)

Rules:

Posts must be relevant to programming, programmers, or computer science.
No NSFW content.
Jokes must be in good taste. No hate speech, bigotry, etc.

founded 5 years ago

MODERATORS

AgreeableLandscape@lemmy.ml

cat_programmer@lemmy.ml

110

Debugging (lemmy.ml)

submitted 2 weeks ago by yogthos@lemmy.ml to c/programmerhumor@lemmy.ml

26 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] yogthos@lemmy.ml 7 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

I find setters/getters are generally an antipattern because they obfuscate behavior. When you access a field you know what it looks like, but if you pass it through some implicit transformation in a getter then you have to know what that was.

[–] TheDoctor@hexbear.net 5 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Yeah. I can understand the use case when it’s something relating to keeping simple state in sync by replacing it with derived state. But this particular case was flushing a cache after each get, which made each get of the property non-deterministic based on the class’s state.

[–] yogthos@lemmy.ml 6 points 2 weeks ago

lol yeah that sounds like a nightmare