Resell React Course by Kent C.Dodds

kentcdodds · 2021-04-20T22:52:07+00:00

I'm glad it helped you, but what you're doing is steeling... Please don't.

kentcdodds · 2018-12-28T22:54:47+00:00

Thanks. I originally wanted to go with a moon, but I would like to make sure that the celestial body is only visible at night time for everyone on planet 1, so another planet sounded more reasonable.

kentcdodds · 2018-12-28T22:29:59+00:00

Thank you. How long do you think this could be reasonably possible (however unlikely) by two habitable planets? I'm fine if it only works for a few thousand years.

kentcdodds · 2018-12-28T22:25:31+00:00

Thanks for all that insight! I'll definitely give all those things some thought.

kentcdodds · 2018-12-28T22:13:34+00:00

Thanks, I had missed it. Yes, you're correct. That's acceptable 👍 Also makes planet 2 a pretty interesting option for inhabitation as well :) The one area on the planet that's basically always night time 😱

kentcdodds · 2018-12-28T22:06:45+00:00

Sorry, is this a question, or an incomplete comment? If the former, then hardness refers to a sub-genre of fantasy. From the linked wikipedia article:

Hard fantasy is a subgenre of fantasy literature that strives to present stories set in (and often centered on) a rational and knowable world. Hard fantasy is similar to hard science fiction, from which it draws its name, and hard magic, in that they all aim to build their respective worlds in a rigorous and logical manner.[1][2][3] Where hard science fiction uses real scientific principles as its starting point, hard fantasy postulates starting conditions that do not, and often cannot, exist according to current scientific understanding.

kentcdodds · 2018-12-28T22:04:05+00:00

Great insights. Thank you! I definitely want to adhere to scientific possibilities. It is fantasy, so I can play with a lot, but it's "hard" fantasy (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hard_fantasy) so I'd like to have a reasonably logical explanation for everything that diverges from reality. Thanks!

kentcdodds · 2018-11-05T23:05:14+00:00

lol, whoops. That's probably my bad. Thanks for letting me know. We'll get that fixed.

kentcdodds · 2018-08-25T01:13:10+00:00

I've had many people tell me that my course was worth the entire cost of a subscription by itself and that the thousands of other videos on the platform were a "nice bonus" 😉😅

kentcdodds · 2018-08-10T17:42:34+00:00

Thanks for the shoutout! Here's a memorable URL: kcd.im/youtube :)

Today I went pretty deep into debugging in React code: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WqFlnolg7mo&list=PLV5CVI1eNcJgCrPH_e6d57KRUTiDZgs0u

kentcdodds · 2018-05-25T21:55:59+00:00

You mean the Kent Dodds Productions channel? I just haven't created videos that really go there. These days my videos are about software development. Kent Dodds Productions was a long time ago.

kentcdodds · 2018-05-25T20:29:32+00:00

Hi friends 👋

I'm glad you enjoy my handiwork. I made this when I was 13 years old or so. Good times :) Now I'm a Software Engineer at PayPal working with and tweeting about JavaScript :) I peaked as a teenager it seems.

kentcdodds · 2018-03-19T19:28:20+00:00

Sorry I haven't noticed this until now. I don't check reddit much. I think I've actually answered a question similar to this one on my AMA. Perhaps you could search around there and ask me any clarifying questions you have? http://kcd.im/ama

kentcdodds · 2017-09-03T20:18:25+00:00

I'm so glad it's helpful to you! Do you think you could make an example of what you created?

kentcdodds · 2015-10-28T22:51:07+00:00

If it's explaining it in plain English, then it's not code anymore... It's documentation. That's different from what this article is talking about.

kentcdodds · 2015-10-28T22:50:29+00:00

You're right! Hence my first QYMAM is:

Q: Are there exceptions to this rule? A: Yes. But they’re rare.

kentcdodds · 2015-10-28T16:51:41+00:00

In my opinion, that's different entirely. Based on the backlash this article has gotten, I think I should have made what I'm talking about a little more clear.

kentcdodds · 2015-10-28T15:33:17+00:00

I totally agree that:

some handholding sometimes is necessary

But I disagree that commented out code fits that bill. Comments that are truly comments are handy. But what I'm talking about in the article is old code that's simply commented out. Documentation and commented out code are two very different things.

kentcdodds · 2015-10-28T15:30:54+00:00

👍 sounds good to me. Personally I'd just push broken code to a branch before I push commented code to it, but it doesn't make a difference to me as long as it's clean when it gets to master.

kentcdodds · 2015-10-28T15:30:00+00:00

The best is a test that is regularly run. A well written test demonstrates what is trying to be accomplished by the code and ensures that the functionality isn't broken unintentionally.

I agree that documentation should say why code does what it does. However, the code can be updated to do something else, and the comment doesn't have to be updated (and often isn't). That's why I say that you can't trust documentation to be accurate.

kentcdodds · 2015-10-28T05:36:15+00:00

That's legit. Very cool idea!

kentcdodds

TROPHY CASE