• 0 Posts
  • 68 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 11th, 2023

help-circle





  • And I’ve never personally seen anyone called a racist for criticizing a show’s writing quality. In fact, there are plenty of people in this thread expressing distaste for Discovery who don’t seem to be getting much flack for it at all.

    For my part, while Discovery had its faults, I’d favour its writing over Enterprise’s any day of the week. Seems like a lot of fans have really warmed up to Enterprise in the past few years, but in my day it was almost universally derided, and every time I’ve tried to give it a rewatch it’s only reinforced that impression.







  • In 1997 adding a sexy Borg crew member to Voyager reeked of desperation. But the writers actually gave a shit and whoever was in charge of casting took the time to find someone who could actually act, so in the end Seven Of Nine became one of the best things to come out of Voyager (nevermind the cringe worthy marketing and costume).

    End of the day, I don’t care about the mental state of the exec signing off on an idea, because even a bad one can turn out good with the right talent. And I don’t see why Star Trek as a teen drama is a bad idea. Star Trek can work with all sorts of genres, and we’ve still got SNW holding down the fort as the old school exploration series.





  • I’m a new developer. Is that referring to page 123 of the in-house documentation? Version 12.3 of the code? I have no clue.

    You’d have to call it something like calculatePersonalIncomeTaxPerTaxCodeSection1_2_3, but I get exhausted just looking at that. There comes a point where the cognitive work of reading crazy long camel case names is more trouble than it’s worth.

    An explanation of what specification a function was written to implement is a perfectly appropriate comment. Could be improved by a direct link where possible. But it’s worth noting what that comment isn’t doing - specifying any implementation details. For that, I really can just read the code.