Difference between revisions of "Talk:1671: Arcane Bullshit"
| Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
I modified the explanation on OOP to include Structured & Procedural language code and briefly described the 80's era of low level languages. | I modified the explanation on OOP to include Structured & Procedural language code and briefly described the 80's era of low level languages. | ||
[[User:Digital_Night|Digital_Night]] ([[User talk:Digital_Night|talk]]) 15:41, 22 April 2016 (UTC) | [[User:Digital_Night|Digital_Night]] ([[User talk:Digital_Night|talk]]) 15:41, 22 April 2016 (UTC) | ||
| + | |||
| + | OK, I rewrote the kernel compiling explanation to explain why someone would recompile a 80's era kernel. Modular kernels sure are nice! | ||
| + | [[User:Digital night|Digital night]] ([[User talk:Digital night|talk]]) 15:50, 22 April 2016 (UTC) | ||
Revision as of 15:50, 22 April 2016
I was obsessively refreshing XKCD and the new comic popped up. Then I did the same on ExplainXKCD to make an explanation. Here's my first rough-draft attempt. Papayaman1000 (talk) 13:34, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
Your explanation confuses OOP with structured programming. Svorkoetter (talk) 15:03, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
Developing a kernel is not the same as compiling a kernel. You would, for example, rebuild a Linux kernel after you've added a module, or changed some parameters. Also, the purpose of object-oriented programming is not to solve the problem of spaghetti code. (That problem was solved by structured programming.) It's to enforce principles of abstraction, information hiding and modularity. Krishnanp (talk) 15:20, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
I modified the explanation on OOP to include Structured & Procedural language code and briefly described the 80's era of low level languages. Digital_Night (talk) 15:41, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
OK, I rewrote the kernel compiling explanation to explain why someone would recompile a 80's era kernel. Modular kernels sure are nice! Digital night (talk) 15:50, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
