Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by fluffybucktsnek 56 days ago
Then, surely, you should be able to find a link to a ECS class's source easily. So where is it?

Also, remember, it's not my responsibility to search to prove your arguments. Burden of proof is on the claimant, as it goes.
1 comments
CyberDildonics 56 days ago
https://jslee02.github.io/awesome-entity-component-system/
link
fluffybucktsnek 56 days ago
Funny, there are no classes named "ECS" in that link. In fact, there are no classes at all, because you didn't actually link a class source. Why push the step of searching for the class towards the reader when you could do it yourself? Wasn't it easy? I wonder why?

Taking a cursory look (which is already beyond my responsibilities) at https://github.com/redxdev/ECS/blob/master/ECS.h, by searching "class ECS" and "struct ECS" and "EntityComponentSystem" wields no results.

link
CyberDildonics 55 days ago
They're ecs, some of them are wrapped in classes. Classes are just a simple programming structure. You should probably learn how to program before arguing all this stuff.
link
fluffybucktsnek 55 days ago
>They're ecs, some of them wrapped in classes.

No, they aren't.

> You should probably learn how to program before arguing all this stuff.

Notice how I didn't reveal whether I program or not, yet you still made assumptions about it. I suspect that you either are a poor programmer or a troll.

link
CyberDildonics 55 days ago
you either are a poor programmer or a troll.

Didn't you just say something about "ad hominem" (even though you used it incorrectly, pointing out something negative if it's related is not ad hominem).

You don't know what a data structure is or what a class does or doesn't do, that's not something programmers have to worry about. They don't have to consult wikipedia for a definition.

link
fluffybucktsnek 54 days ago
It would be ad hominen argument if it was an argument, not a side note. Whereas, in your case, you used to dismiss my position as "no real programmer needs to consult the Wikipedia for definitions" (according to whom, you?).

Since you failed to cite any third party source for definitions, whether your definitions are actually conventional depend solely on your authority as a programmer, in contrast to me, who cited Wikipedia (and there are many others I can cite too). An attack on your authority is no longer a fallacy, but, towards me, it is, since I never relied on my authority as a programmer.

Never mind the fact that being a good programmer doesn't mean you know the definition of technical terms.

link