It definitely depends on how talented you are. For most beginners this would be a 2-3 month homework project, if they could finish at all. However it's probably doable in a few days of hard work if you're awesome. It can vary a lot.
You're not bad off at all. How is your knowledge on cs fundamentals, like data structures etc? A lot of companies focus on these when interviewing. However, if you can demonstrate the ability to actually code things that work (ie: show them something you made and explain part of it like you know what you're talking about), you're most of the way there. Most applicants to programming jobs cannot actually make things.
To a certain extent, your ability to program is going to translate from any language to any other language.
Oh, yeah that would explain a lot :lol thanks.
Definitely. A lot of programming these days is about managing complexity. You have so many requirements for the software to work that the real difficulty lies in meeting all the requirements in such a way that they're easy to change or fix individually.
My experience with lua is pretty limited, but I remember it fondly. What sucks about it? Rant, you'll feel better
I'm coming from a decade-and-half of professional Python development (and some C, Java, Javascript and even a little PHP, double-ugh.) So I'm not really coming from the nicest place to be criticising LuaMy experience with lua is pretty limited, but I remember it fondly. What sucks about it? Rant, you'll feel better
I just worded what I needed poorly here. I'm a dummy!
model.thisParticularArrayCollection = new ArrayCollection();
model.thisParticularArrayCollection = model.everyItem;
model.thisParticularArrayCollection.filterFunction = removeDuplicates;
model.thisParticularArrayCollection.refresh();tempObj:Object = {};
private function removeDuplicates(item:Object):Boolean
{
var retVal:Boolean = false;
if (!tempObj.hasOwnProperty(item.itemnumber)) {
// if not found add the item to the object
tempObj[item.itemnumber] = item;
retVal = true;
trace(tempObj.toString());
}
return retVal;
}var myCar = new Object();
myCar.model = "Corolla";
myCar.make = "Toyota";
myCar.color = "red";var myCar =
{
model : "Corolla",
make : "Toyota",
color : "red"
};var myCar = {};
myCar.model = "Corolla";
myCar.make = "Toyota";
myCar.color = "red";I usually use the 2nd way. It's also most similar to JSON syntax, which you'll find all over the place.
for sentence in snippet, phrase:
result = sentence[:]my_single_list= ['hey, a single-item list']
my_single_list_copy = my_single_list[:]
print my_single_list_copyNo, [:] represents a whole of sequence slice. "You're using the list slice syntax [:] to effectively make a slice from the very first element to the very last one."
>>> a = "foo"
>>> b = a[:]
>>> a == b
True
>>> a is b
True
>>> a = [1,2,3]
>>> b = a[:]
>>> a == b
True
>>> a is b
FalseI did those and had some fun with them. The hardest thing I did was program a version of PacMan in it, which was difficult since it doesn't natively support inputs.
Using new anything is unsavory in JS, when declaring basic types. The last one and the second one are actually called literals.
var literalObject = {};
var literalArray = [];
var literalBoolean = true;
var literalString = 'string';
var literalInteger = 1;The only difference regarding slicing (and this applies to all mutable/immutable sequences) is that you can't assign to an immutable sequence's slice.
This is demonstrating the string interning implementation detail of the "C"Python interpreter that is not guaranteed to be present in any other implementation. You get the same effect with:
>>> a = "spam"
>>> b = "spam"
>>> a is b
True>>> a = "this is a really long string"
>>> b = "this is a really long string"
>>> a is b
False
>>> "this is a really long string" is "this is a really long string"
True