Skip Navigation

InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)LI
Posts
1
Comments
353
Joined
2 yr. ago

  • I read the abstract of the two links. The first one just says "tarrifs bad" without even mentioning our discussion above.

    The second abstract said they did not find any evidence of "tarrifs good", other factors had greater impact for growth. This is not the same question either.

  • I don't get it. If we do retaliate, the US will have something to gain (back) by removing the tariffs.

    I don't know what studies you are referring to (please leave a link) but it seems counterintuitive to not have that bargaining chip to force a quick end to the tarriffs (See US vs Canada 2025, US vs Mexico 2025).

    I don't see how one could reasonably measure policies like these through time; of course it's worse in the short term for all involved parties but should resolve the situation faster. If they only measure the time during active tarriffs of course it's better through survivorship bias.

  • I'm sorry I don't getting your point . You start off by agreeing that you don't like the extra complexity that the update statements give. Then do some pseudo code of something entirely different where we all already agree is not an issue.

    Then at the end your conclusion is that it is totally feasible. Why? You still didn't adress the problem of updating the state

  • Ok, I mentioned a state machine in another sub thread. It's not as bad if you already have a state machine.

    It's still adding more complexity though - again when the value is updated. You still need to change the state when saving. You need to decide which state to use when starting the game.

    There is still risk of screwing that up when refactoring. And still the value is nearly none.

    Regarding state mchines, it's a complexity in itaelf to add random flags ro the state machine. Next time you want to add another flag you need to double all the states again, e.g. PAUSED, PAUSED_AND_SAVED, PAUSED_AND_MUTED, PAUSED_AND_SAVED_AND_MUTED. I would never add mute to the logic of the menu but that's the pnly example I could come up with. Maybe you see my point there, at least?

  • Plus all the lines to update the state, when the menu is closed, when the game is closed (i.e should it be true or false at startup), when the game is saved obviously.

    That's at least three more lines plus the one you mentioned for no extra value. And again it's easier to screw it up e.g. while refactoring.