BreakfastMan said:
All of my lol. Just... All of it. Tell me, how many years of Java experience do you have? When did you last work with C++ or Ruby? What are your thoughts on throwing exceptions versus returning nulls for errors?
Neither of these things have anything to do with the discussion at hand but I do applaud you trying to smoke-screen your argument with some jargon you probably found on google in hopes that people find you educated. If you had left your post off here instead of continuing to reply to me, you may actually have fooled someone into thinking that you're a professional.
I will give you some credit: you managed to mangle this quote tree up something fierce
BreakfastMan said:
Also, oh no, rewriting logic! Changing data structures! How horrifying! Sorry, but if you are trying to make this sound scary... You are doing a real shit job. This might work on someone who isn't programmer, but it is doing nothing but giving me some laughs.
Congratulations, this one line of text, from you, that you wrote, proves with 100% certainty that you've never had to program in a professional environment of any kind.
Rewriting logic and changing data structures requires QA, do you know what QA stands for? It stands for Quality Assurance. See, those data structures and that logic isn't used in just the marriage part of the code. That is used for
-Making your character
-Finding OTHER characters
-Really doing ANYTHING with your character or other characters
Which are now all things that need to be re-tested. Like the entire game would need to go through QA again to ensure it doesn't become unstable and crash now that the logic and data structures have changed.
You can "laugh it up" all you want, but anyone who has had to deal with a project that is being worked on by multiple people is getting their laughs at the person who is conceited enough to believe that you can change a few lines of code and it should be easy, nothing could ever go wrong thanks to that.
Thank you for also ignoring the link, which explains in more detail WHY you are wrong. But you can continue to yuck it up while I merely facepalm at your continued stubbornness.
BreakfastMan said:
This isn't to mention the other problem: because the game was randomly
Right... And where did I say the solution was to randomly assign gender tags, exactly?
You have either intentionally mis-read my post or are trying to frame it that way. Or perhaps you don't entirely know what a data structure does.
Read this link
http://www.ign.com/articles/2014/05/05/nintendo-on-gay-marriage-and-tomodachi-life
That one
Right there
The system was experiencing instability because the transfer, from the DS to the 3DS, was resulting in the gender tag being randomly assigned. Which resulted in data corruption and system crashes. This is how the bug started in the first place.
BreakfastMan said:
You are far over-selling what would likely need to be done. More complex changes have been implemented in patches.
PATCHES are handled by the original developer. It is their job, no one else's, to keep the game stable.
The localization team has no such responsibility and I once again find it incredulous that you continue to think that they do.
Also PATCHES, of all kind, are QA and bug tested. Which is where my entire argument is stemming from: this patched-in feature would require another round of development in order to implement. You can check that link and see why this is such a problem if you wish.
BreakfastMan said:
The question isn't whether or not it uses objects. It is whether it actually uses them well and the code isn't incredibly brittle.
That is taking my words completely out of context. A change this trivial to code that is already working really shouldn't cause it to explode. Their code shouldn't be this fucking brittle.
Okay, I have to know, what does "brittle code" mean in your definition? There's cluttered code, which means it's difficult to read. Spaghetti code, which is difficult to understand code that has nebulous control structures.
But "brittle code"? Is it made of peanut brittle? As far as any competent programmer is concerned, when you put in things that simply aren't truthful or are not what the system was expecting into the system, you get unexpected system behavior 100% of the time.
You CAN'T have 'brittle code' because any code that behaves unexpectedly is by definition unstable code. Any object you pass that isn't the exactly object the machine was expecting is OF COURSE going to make unstable code and I find it ridiculous for you to believe that you can make code that doesn't behave this way.
Are you actually a wizard that uses magic programming that can handle unexpected objects and undefined data structures? Because if so, I'll gladly take your class on magic programming.
EDIT:
Okay, I did some searching to try and understand what the hell you were talking about
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_brittleness
You mean THIS?
software brittleness is the increased difficulty in fixing older software that may appear reliable, but fails badly when presented with unusual data or altered in a seemingly minor way
This doesn't have anything to do with the subject at hand. This is about old software that receives periodic updates until it's not stable anymore. This does. not. apply. to. this. game. Are you trying to redefine what 'brittle software' actually means?
It's not even something you can 'create', it's a result of old code being patched until it cannot function in a modern setting anymore. As far as you or I know, this doesn't apply to this game.