undefined | Better HN

0 pointstwic3y ago0 comments

I'm not going to argue this is good, but it's fairly analogous:

    boolean isEven(int n) {
        boolean even = true;
        for (; n > 0; --n) even = !even;
        return even;
    }

0 comments

2 comments · 1 top-level

chriswarbo3y ago· 1 in thread

Your implementation has lost the encapsulation of mine, and broken the call-graph relationships. For example:

- Updates and bug-fixes to the `isOdd` function will not be inherited by your `isEven` function.

- If I set a breakpoint in this function, it won't get triggered when I call `isOdd`.

- Your `isEven` function requires an implementation of `!`

- etc.

twicOP3y ago

> - Updates and bug-fixes to the `isOdd` function will not be inherited by your `isEven` function.

> - If I set a breakpoint in this function, it won't get triggered when I call `isOdd`.

    boolean isOdd(int n) {
      return !isEven(n);
    }

> - Your `isEven` function requires an implementation of `!`

Yes, but this language has one, so that's fine.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse