Profile cover photo
Profile photo
Moandji Ezana
124 followers -
Programmer, father of 2.
Programmer, father of 2.

124 followers
About
Moandji's posts

Post has attachment
"Under our present system, the military and government use big data to suppress populations and spy on civilians. Corporations use it to boost profits, increase productivity, and extend the process of commodification ever deeper into our lives. But data and statistical algorithms don’t produce these outcomes — capitalism does. To realize the potentially amazing benefits of big data, we must fight against the undemocratic forces that seek to turn it into a tool of commodification and oppression."

Post has attachment
A portrait of an African American woman programmer/mathematician at NASA from the 50s to the 80s. It's amazing that she persevered despite all the obstacles that were deliberately placed in her path.

Also, the picture linked to on Wikipedia is amazing.

Post has attachment
toml4j 0.4.0 is now available on Maven Central.

It adds support for the TOML language's latest features. Importantly, toml4j is now a lot lighter-weight: the dependency on Parboiled - and its cumbersome transitive dependencies - has been dropped.

So switch your config files over to TOML now, if you haven't already!

https://github.com/mwanji/toml4j

I'm considering putting a Java 8-friendly interface on a library of mine. It has methods such as getString(key), getLong(key), etc. Currently, these methods return null if the key doesn't exist. I'd like them to return Optional, but not in an annoying way.

Do you think it's better to only have the getters return Optional, or also have overloaded versions that take a default value (eg. getString(key, defaultValue))?

Having only the Optional version works well when you're truly not sure if a value exists, but having to call get() all the time is annoying. On the other hand, having methods that take a default value feels like it's duplicating the role of Optional.

Today I accidentally discovered that you can write a lamba expression for a class you don't have access to. Does this seem like a good practice or an anti-pattern?

A code example:

public class A {

  public void take(PrivateClass pc) {}
 
 @FunctionalInterface
  private static class PrivateClass {
    void handle(Object o);
  }
}

Another class can do:

new A().take(o -> {});

but not

A.PrivateClass l = o -> {};
new A().take(l);

It's kind of weird to semi-expose a class in this way...

Post has attachment

Post has attachment
Moandji Ezana commented on a post on Blogger.
Re: jawr, how did you like it? I'm currently writing a simpler alternative to wro4j and jawr and am wondering what people use now.

Post has attachment
I'm getting ready to insert a floppy disk full of JavaBeans into my computer right now.

Post has attachment
All these new TLDs are mostly ridiculous (.ink ? .today ?), but some of them have fun uses. The alphabet URL had already been taken by the time I thought of it, sadly.
Photo

Post has attachment
I'm pretty sure whoever created Eclipse Luna's Dark theme was on an acid trip. It feels like every word is a different colour. Eg. variable names are one colour when they are initialised, and another when they are used. Really?
Photo
Wait while more posts are being loaded