10 von 22 Kunden fanden die folgende Rezension hilfreich
Worst programming book ever...,
What is worse to me is that the author uses about the same amount of text to explain the complex prototype property as he uses for how to delete array members. He just fails to explain the heart of the matter.
In the preface, the author states that the book is tight and the reader should not hesitate to re-read a paragraph should he not understand. I never hesitate to re-read if I do not understand, but doing so in his book more than once revealed no relevance.
On the other hand, he e.g. claims that the continue statement is evil and that he couln't remember any code that was not improved by removing the continue statement, but he fails to deliver an example. In my 20 years of programming C I never heard nor felt that continue was evil. (You can build horrible code using the best of statements, I'm sure.)
The only good thing about this book is that he explains pretty well how to avoid global variables (which *are* bad, but he again fails to explain why. This could be done in one short paragraph, maybe instead of the JSON parser source code).
Anyway, have fun!
Sortieren: Ältester zuerst | Neuester zuerst
1-2 von 2 Diskussionsbeiträgen
Ersteintrag: 19.03.2011 10:30:45 GMT+01:00
imho "continue", being a practical "goto", does not even need discussion among OO developers
Antwort auf einen früheren Beitrag vom 28.01.2012 08:36:51 GMT+01:00
J. Vogel meint:
continue skips one cycle of a loop. I consider it good programming style because it saves the programmer (and reader for that matter) from deeply nested if-statements. It compares to using the return statement in functions to do some simple if-checks, which flattens the code. So why is continue "evil"?
As much as I admire Crockford, every programmer has his or her own style and it is a bit of a sport to declare this and that "evil". But even so, continue will never be as evil as eval. :-)
‹ Zurück 1 Weiter ›