rodrigoreis22

26 ms·

1.
by rodrigoreis22 5y ago
well it looks like Netflix should have fired you way sooner, they're getting soft. This is a very entitled blog post and disconnected from reality.
2.
by rodrigoreis22 12y ago
I saw this video and showed them.. lol. I partially agree with the game example shown in the video.. I found the final code quite hard to understand. But I think that's due to my lack of knowledge in all the native stuff Python can do.
3.
by rodrigoreis22 12y ago
I loved this essay Paul Graham wrote: http://paulgraham.com/noop.html Quoting: "My own feeling is that object-oriented programming is a useful technique in some cases, but it isn't something that has to pervade ev
4.
by rodrigoreis22 12y ago
lol.. probably! The very old brainwash people suffer at college and then go out thinking OOP is a silver-bullet that will solve all of your problems :)
5.
by rodrigoreis22 12y ago
It's not currently fat and repetitive.. it has decent layered-organized structure.. My argument is that you can have many of the benefits of OOP in Python just using modules. When you need many instances, each with its own isolated sta
6.
by rodrigoreis22 12y ago
It does work. The argument it's OOP enforces more organized code base.. I don't personally agree. You can have a very clean non-OOP python code and you can also have a very ugly and bad OOP-based code.. it just seems stupid.
7.
Ask HN: What do you think about using classes in Python?
13 points by rodrigoreis22 12y ago|19 comments
8.
by rodrigoreis22 12y ago
Today is easier to get a beautiful template and customize it than building something ugly from scratch.