new | show | ask | jobs Github

soperj a day ago

The bike shedders have entered the chat.

There's a difference between nitpicking the topic of the article and nitpicking someone's grammar.

▲

dumpsterdiver a day ago | parent [-]

To be fair, it really is a confusing way of communicating, and it’s useful feedback when taken to heart.

▲

Conscat a day ago | parent [-]

It's not confusing.

▲

Someone a day ago | parent | next [-]

> Not nothing, but I don't think it's incorrect to say has any more OOP than general purpose languages like Lua or JavaScript in that sense.

IMO, that text is confusing.

“Not nothing” is saying it has some OO features.

“I don't think it's incorrect to say has any more OOP than general purpose languages like Lua or JavaScript in that sense” = I think this language has more OOP than languages like Lua or JavaScript”

So, that more or less says “A, but A”. If so, what’s the “but” about?

	▲	pull_my_finger a day ago \| parent [-]
		I think it needs more negatives. "I don't think it's incorrect to say [it does not have] any more OOP than general purpose languages like Lua or JavaScript in that sense". I had retyped it a few times trying not to come off as overly negative or a jerk.

▲

F3nd0 a day ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> Not nothing, but I don't think it's incorrect to say has any more OOP than general purpose languages like Lua or JavaScript in that sense.

The comment is saying that the language has more OOP than Lua or JavaScript, but it seems like it might have been meant to say the opposite. That, and it appears to be missing a subject (which I assume to be ‘it’ or ‘the language in question’, based on context). So personally I do find it somewhat confusing.

The problem is not the double negative itself, though; it’s more how it’s being used in context here.

▲

lukan a day ago | parent | prev [-]

It was also to me. I also prefer simple clear language, so much for my feedback. Can we now move on?