>>27
Did I say they were?
You know Java... LOL!
You implied I had to know Java to recognise misuse of design patterns, even though Java is a niggerly easy language to just read if you know any C-derived language even a tiny bit, thereby implying that you didn't know design patterns exist independently of the language, and in fact predate it.
I used that because I don't know Java
You also don't know anything about design patterns. In fact, you don't know anything even remotely relevant to this thread, yet you continue to shit it up. gb2/pr/
(but I just read some Java code where there was this type called ``Object,'' would that be right?).
No.
null isn't a constant (as Java is too high-level for that sort of faggotry) or an object (as Java is OO in the same sense that Sepples is OO; that is, not really), or even a primitive. It's just a keyword.
You obviously know Java... get out of my nigger.
I do know Java, and design patterns, which means I have an informed opinion on them, which I can back up with more than just failed attempts at shitty satire. You, on the other hand, are an ignorant dickfuck.
Java
is a crap language suffering from
ENTERPRISE cancer, but you aren't in any position to say so, as you don't know anything about it.
Design patterns
are retarded bullshit, but again, you aren't in any position to know this.
The fact that you're proud of your ignorance leads me to believe you're still in high school (or midle school). /pr/ will value your skills more highly than /prog/.