I have the following:

Platform declaration clash: The following declarations have the same JVM signature ( (IILkotlin/jvm/internal/DefaultConstructorMarker;)V): 
public constructor GlslProgram(vertex: GlShader, fragment: GlShader) defined in gln.program.GlslProgram
public constructor GlslProgram(name: Int = ...) defined in gln.program.GlslProgram

GlShader

is an inlined

Int

class

how is this possible?

`run`:

fun getFilm(t: String) = db.getFilm(t).run { copy(actors = actors.filterNot { it.isDead }) }

It's a weirdly named function simple smile

Imo version with local function looks better and less cryptic

also in case of any changes you will have more clear diff without full refactoring of this function

Ok, I'm not crazy. Run is named too confusingly as well, it distracts from the intention imo

thanks

I was wondering if it’s possible to “mirror” a nested class hierarchy within

typealias

E.g.

class Parent { class Child }
typealias Dad = Parent

Parent.Child() // OK
Dad.Child() // Unresolved

Yes, I know right, I’m just thinking at the most effective workaround 😄 e.g.

object Dad {
    fun Child() = Parent.Child()
}
fun Dad() = Parent()

Dad() // Ok
Dad.Child() // OK

if there exists a language that would greatly benefit from interfaces and default function and property values most it would definitely be javascript

lodash

.get

is that

it astounds me that microsoft had to impose pretend interfaces onto javascript because the language doesn't support it...

_.get(this, ['app', 'credentials', 'email'], defaultValue)

works really nicely

it's just such a poorly designed language. it's like spaghetti code: the language

but look at that syntax

that syntax is ass upon ass

it's a function?

I like it more than I like

a?.b?.c ?? d

, but syntax is very personal

other than the equality system, I actually like most of js

functions are incredibly lightweight

i can't fathom why anyone would prefer any syntax that begins with

_.get()

it just screams fundamental issues if you're using underscores like that...

but to each their own. i'm sorry. i'm just frustrated 😞

I mean, if you don't want the underscore,

import { get } from 'lodash';

no different to using the java or kotlin stdlibs. you still need to bring the functions into scope

kotlin's extensions allow you to pretty much change the syntax of the language to whatever you want. i like that as an option

I agree 🙂

I think the extensions and especially the fact that they are scoped, not monkey patched globally is a huge strength

of course i'm newish to js. i still don't really know what a prototype is, and at this point i'm too afraid to ask