Theo Reacts to Prime Reacts To Professor Reacting To Prime Reacting To FP
Вставка
- Опубліковано 26 лис 2023
- I was forced to do this, please don't bully me too much. Y'all probably know my thoughts on Object Oriented Programming vs Functional Programming already (I think)
"ORIGINAL" VIDEO: • Prime Reacts To Profes...
Check out my Twitch, Twitter, Discord more at t3.gg
S/O Ph4se0n3 for the awesome edit 🙏 - Наука та технологія
There's so many layers of content in this video that it looks a lot like the codebases I've worked in the past 5 years.
Hopefully you got enough benefits to afford therapy for that PTSD 😮
Hipster Adam Scott dev reacts to squeaky Dr. Disrespect dev reacting to based professor reacting to… Yup mental segfault. Somebody kick my chair 😂
The amount of abstraction in this video leads me to believe Theo is a closet OOP programmer.
THIS WAS LITERALLY MY PROFESSOR FOR PROGRAMMING LANGUAGES AHHHHHHHH
And yes we did spend many classes discussing blog posts and whatnot. Honestly was a nice way to dip our toes into the "real world" discussion of software development lol
Omg
prime and theo's so funny at this point. They are like little brothers who'd always fight but care for each other
Theo just enlightened me about Primes' consistency. That's wild
Yes, can you make a video about OOP vs FP or share the links of the videos that you have recorded about this topic? As you said at university (even in Italy ) they stress you a lot about OOP and you start to think that OOP is the best way to do things
Just a typical example of universities teaching outdated stuff.
Tech is best learnt by example building stuff because it moves so fast forward.
Richard Feldman talks about it ua-cam.com/video/6YbK8o9rZfI/v-deo.htmlsi=L7iBYgGGFU9CAxAh
ua-cam.com/video/3n17wHe5wEw/v-deo.htmlsi=TOjLE2HIY8mIoWUr
i only had time to watch one video this morning so this was really efficient and allowed me to watch 4 videos at once. thanks Theo!
The key issue lies in the nature of how individuals experience A and B. Since A is experienced generally under some form of compulsion or necessity, and B is experienced by choice, the resulting satisfaction ratings are not directly comparable.
1. **Forced vs. Voluntary Experience**: People might rate A more favorably not necessarily because it's intrinsically better, but because their expectations or attitudes towards it are different due to the forced nature of the experience. In contrast, choosing B might come with a pre-existing positive bias, as people tend to choose things they already like or expect to enjoy.
2. **Expectation and Perception**: When people are forced into something (like A), they might have lower expectations, making it easier to have a satisfactory experience. Conversely, when people choose something (like B), they might have higher expectations, which could lead to disappointment even if the experience is objectively good.
3. **Contextual Bias**: The survey's conclusions are skewed by the context in which A and B are experienced. This context significantly influences satisfaction levels, but it is not accounted for in the simple comparison of scores.
Therefore, the survey's conclusion that A is better than B is not valid without considering the different contexts in which these experiences occur. A more accurate survey would need to account for these differences in how people come to experience A and B.
This phenomenon is closely related to what's known as "response bias" in survey methodology. Specifically, it resembles a type of response bias called "selection bias" or "voluntary response bias." Here's a breakdown:
1. **Selection Bias**: This occurs when the survey sample is not representative of the population due to the manner in which participants are selected or choose to participate. In your example, the experiences of A and B are not equally representative because one is forced and the other is chosen.
2. **Voluntary Response Bias**: Particularly relevant to your scenario, this bias happens when individuals choose to participate in a survey, often leading to over-representation of certain opinions or experiences. People who have strong opinions or specific experiences (like those choosing B) are more likely to participate.
Additionally, this could also touch on aspects of:
- **Confirmation Bias**: If people choose B because they already believe they will like it, their positive experience might be influenced by their expectation to like it.
- **Cognitive Dissonance**: People might rate their chosen option (B) more favorably to justify their choice and align with their self-perception.
Understanding these biases is crucial for interpreting survey results accurately and for designing surveys that minimize these distortions.
Thanks ChatGPT
This is why I need 4 monitors
I want someone to Next on Theo Reacting to Prime Reacting on a Professor Reacting on Prime.
Also don't forget the first Prime vid in this "pointer list" was also a reaction to *Continous Delivery* reacting to OOP vs FP discussion.
I see what you did there… next instead of react… very good
The CEO of HTMX is next in this chain.
The deepest layer is a guy reacting to himself and I support this madness
I'd really like a video on functional vs object oriented programming. I'm in college right now taking both an OOP class and a Discrete Math class (where we use haskell to write certain algorithms, we're not building apps with it, just simple functions). I'm really digging functional programming, but I also like this idea of modelling and designing apps in UML for oop. So I guess my brain is becoming dependand on the OOP paradigm since my first (and only way right now) to think about designing an application is the OOP way. So yeah I'd love to know more about FP since my college doesn't really have a dedicated class for that paradigm, so since I have to learn it on my own I would love to see more content on it.
"We are so deep boys... we are so deep"
~Theo 2023
18:33 when inferring return types, doesn‘t that make your application vulnerable to errors?
Doesn‘t the compiler might misrefer the type and therefore create an error?
I believe I would rather explicitly define a return type and be on the safe side instead of letting the compiler choose.
Yeah, seriously, inferred return types are evil. If you need an ability to "change it in all places quickly", make it a type-level constant or whatever. In the worst case, make it a preprocessor "define". That's still better than inferred.
as a main "react dev" 😂. i see what you did there
I felt this was more a disagreement about definitions. I'd like to see a follow-up to this but using practical, relatable real-world examples of "code" that very clearly show where the different paradigms shine and where they don't. I have A LOT of respect for both Dave Farley and Theo, but using just words to make your point is hard for we industry mortals to extract the wisdom. More code would be appreciated. The bottom line is if you don't know what you are doing, you can write some pretty bad OOP and pretty bad FP. If you do know what you are doing you can write some pretty good OPP and some pretty good FP.
I really want to see your fp vs oop cuz this is something I have to discuss all the time in uni because it is taught left and right
OOP isn't well defined. Abstraction, Encapsulation and Polymorphism aren't exclusive to OOP. Inheritance, maybe but even OOP devs know inheritance is bad.
@@natescode my main reason for asking for a vid is so I can point ppl to it instead of trying to pick a fight myself 😂
It's strange how as coders we love correcting other coders on the correct wording. Take for example the comment, "FP v OOP, are just different tools to get a job done," massive backlash, "No it's not, it's a paradigm". Good grief, you can't understand the context of the speaker, just because he used the wrong word, really?
Been coding for many years, too long maybe. :), my first proper language C, then moved to C++ (even a bit of MI), Pascal, C#, more recently a little bit of GO/Rust, and now mainly JS/TS. So I would say I have a good grasp of OOP, and have to say FP is way better, and I would put it down to one word "composition", I don't just mean composition in terms of components either, even back end services benefit here.
Looking back, I believe if C had implemented closures, then I don't think C++ would have even been a thing, maybe some namespacing would have been nice too, akin to file/directory namespacing with export/import, not the nightmare C# uses.. :)
Now we want prime to react to this!
Which one is the primary Prime, and which one is the secondary Prime?
Or is this a Composite Prime?
This video has more abstraction layers than your average OOP codebase
Yesss!! I was waiting for this!! Let's keep it going!! LowLevel WHERE ARE YOU?!
Another thought: it would be great for any OOP vs FP vs ?? to include the associated unit/integration/automated tests that go along side them. For me, TDD influences my final code far more than the paradigm I choose.
We need to dwell upon this OOP vs FP shit on this channel, dude...
This is turning into a huge meme 😂😂😂
Truly the peak of reaction content
Please make a video thoroughly distinguishing all the programming paradigms. This seems to be confusing every time I look at it. Especially procedural programming. If possible, also throw some light on languages supporting multiple programming paradigms like functional and class based approach in java for example. Do we just mix the style of programming within a codebase according to one's preference?
We need the original creator to reat to this come on Theo and prime fans assemble
do it, FP for the win, we need more videos that hammer the point home.
100% on the point of "encapsulation" in FP vs OO
Object-Oriented Analysis and Design (OOA/OOD) for OOP, what is the counterpart for Functional Programming (FP)?
Ok I went back over 6 months in your history and it took kind of some time. Still can't find your take on functional programming that you mentioned. Would love to hear it!
Haskell would have never “caught on” like how C did, since it’s just a completely different use case (and time). And besides C is many things but not OOP, it has no objects. It’s strictly procedural.
Theo name-dropping DarkViperAU suddenly was unexpected
The whole video is the best example of recursion ever
UA-cam might need to check and reconsider their video titles length, something tells me - soon it will be needed
Yes to an OOP vs FP video as a "there's another way to do it" kind of video. Show OOP polymorphism then FP pattern matching, etc.
18:40 You are not letting that go are ya?😂
I think that better definition of OOP is "code made of objects calling each other's methods" while FP is "code made of functions executing each other". All the rest is pretty much nonsense, everything people say is "functional" can be practised within OOP and vice versa if you are stubborn enough. There are some concepts that are impossible within some languages like tail-recurrsion optimisation or simply lack of a way to attach functions to data structures but other than that it's pretty much it.
I disagree with your definitions of fp and oop, though they do not really have well specified definitions.
OOP is about modeling state with (domain) objects, while FP is about minimizing state and moving it to the edge of the system.
Please sir, can I have some more (OOP vs FP) content?
Truly unhinged, thank you for your contribution
level of discussion about layers of abstractions:
- one is talking about numerous different layers of business logic, different hierarchies and so on that are probably going to break (logically, not just wrong type reference) with the next small code piece
- other is talking about implicit / explicit return type in TypeScript, because you have to change this return type in several places once you decide to do so
....
These reactions of reactions is the Abstraction from OOP
i'd love to see a video of prime reacting to this !!
13:20 the satisfaction in *_"it's a wrong take"_* lmao
Professor Skipping things they don’t agree with is so true
And when you ask them why, they use pseudo code so you can’t understand why they disagree
Chain of Reactivity pattern recognised
When you use recursion to create multiple levels of reactions to reactions.
Theo: You must keep your videos advertiser friendly.
Also Theo: The kids are so fucked.
I wish I could see Prime reacting to Theo as well. Also interested in the profs and the og youtuber's reaction to all that
Would love an OOP vs FP in-depth video!
Can’t wait to see primes reaction
So which pause button is the one I need to use?
Thanks! Yeah, it is interesting that AP CS A specifically requires I teach Java and focus on OOP. Another reason I basically want to learn everything I can so I can get my students aware of more of these things. Also, cool suggestion on encouraging students to join these kinds of communities. My only concern as a high school teacher is the legal liabilities. If I point students to a community and people in there curse, bully, or share NSFW content, the school and I are arguably responsible for protecting the students against that.
I watch Rich Hickey's presentations a lot (who created Clojure). Would love to see you riff on one of his talks. My intro to him was the talk "Simple Made Easy", which is about the philosophy and goals of FP rather than anything too Clojure-specific.
I like the part where Prime is making fun of the prof enjoying doctor disrespect. They must have installed a new bulb in Primes projectoooooor
I really had this idea for a youtube video with mamy layers reacting. 😂
This hit me right in the AuDHD. This is what my mind is like, but there are ~5 to 50 layers at any given time that intersect in a many to many relationship.
I'd like to hear your take on OOP vs FP.
Gonna have to react to this
we need an extra primeagen reaction to this
Couldn’t believe it when I heard darkviper being mentioned. 😂
I do want functional vs OOP
Would love to know the difference better
What is the length limit for video titles on youtube? How many more links on this chain do we need to hit it?
12 hours so we got room for a few more
@@natescode the length of the title in characters not the length of the video.
While loops and for loops have nothing to do with OOP, they are concepts in procedural programming
Funny thing is while watching this all I see is the video in container with padding that's pinkish-purple then the video player. It reminds me of nesting
Did anybody notice that on the second Prime, the comment section of the professor's video, there is a comment that suggests Prime to react to the professor (21:30)?
What headphones are you using?
This feels like one of those Nickelodeon crossover episodes where characters from other shows appear on another show, and vice-versa 😂
Oh yeah, "The Jimmy Timmy Power Hour" 😂
So many layers of abstraction makes you forget your goal?
But docker is made of layered architecture
18:32 Is Theo's point here that codebases where we need a lot of abstractions blends well with dynamic typed languages like JS? I couldn't complete understand the point behind the sarcasm. What I understand is that Prime is arguing that multiple levels of abstractions becomes problematic to work with due to types being a pain to deal with(hence the preference for 1D abstraction) while Theo's argument seems to suggest that dynamic languages help to relieve this pain point? Did I get this right?
And so, the infinite monetization loop begins
This is a rabbit whole 😂
We want a Prime reaction on this!!!!!!!!!!!!
Let's make Prime react to this now
How about “tool affinity” vs “forced adoption” for the framework of choice vs forced react (respectively)?
This is just so funny.
Good laughs on this one 😂
Patiently waiting for Dave Farley's reaction
Just like we add abstraction layers we need another layer of reacts to videos
Oh ... I see a Prime video reaction to this reaction to him reacting to the professor reacting to him reacting to Dave Farley
Re tools vs paradigms: paradigms are tools you use to shackle your fellow programmers to your preferred way of doing things 😂
This is true inception 5 layers deep having a fight!
Whenever someone says Haskell this and that as part of their effort to disparage FP I know it isn't a serious conversation happening. Talk about using FP programming principles in JS or C#, and now we're talking about FP in the context of real world problems and solutions...and I'm interested.
Which isn't pure FP. Multi Paradigm for the win.
The cycle is complete 🤣
This is how we will get DarkViperAU to learn programming.
Guys, are we seeing recursion happening before our 👀?
Theo piggy backing on Prime 😂😂
OOP was not "prescribed to us by academia". OOP was successful because of Sun and Java. There was marketing strategy by a big company that promoted OOP. Academia just followed that trend. Because Java became popular, Academia started teaching OOP because students would have to learn it.
However, the OOP definition here is really bad. The one thing you supposedly get from OOP is syntactic sugar for dependency inversion. In C you would need explicit pointers to functions, where you don't get proper type safety any more. In OO languages you get to define interfaces, which allow you to get type safety again, when passing different objects that implement the same methods.
That said, other paradigms have already caught up on this, and there now is proper syntactic sugar for pointers to functions in some languages of other paradigms as well, so the only real benefit of OO is gone.
Java would have helped, but I think you missed the big one. C++, Java came out in 1996, C++ was 1985.
I would love to see your go through code examples of OOP and FP and then explain why FP is better
Prime seems like the *main* react dude on YT
This was uploaded exactly in time for my extended morning ritual.
Prewatched!
Inception at its finest 🤣
Multiverse of madness
We must need to go deeper...
Please talk about OOP vs FP
Feels like Im passing around pointers.
Not even the app router can handle all this nested content
my c++ brain wanting to be mean to JS/TS devs....
19:56 HAHAHAHHAHA I'M DEAD
professor reacts to theo reacts to prime reacts to profressor reacts to prime reacts to that guy we all don't know about