You @steakexchange will become a very good programmer.

Also note that you can never directly expose your domain to the browser. This creates security issues and the data will not be suitably formatted for display. You will need to create a special purpose (REST) interface just for the JavaScript to call. And that's coupled.

Be aware that decoupling in such a rigorous way creates significant upfront development cost. You need to get some concrete value out of that.

Never seen the bridge pattern. It has nothing to do with factories, though(??). Seems identical to an "adapter" or a "facade" to me.

Here are some cloud patterns in case you're interested: msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/dn600223.aspx. There are lots of special purpose patterns like this in programming. It's rare to have them catalogued. Sometimes, it's called a set of best practices.

Patterns are everywhere but they're often used in a tasteless and robotic way. For that reason, I think, the pattern catalogue idea became less popular.

I don't see anything wrong with deep data models. But I also don't see how you could have modeled this with inheritance since it's a 1:N relationship at each layer.

Often, you can find a refactoring path to only use tool refactorings that are guaranteed to not break (renaming, adding a nullable method argument, etc.). That way you can make mass changes with confidence.

This breaks reflexivity (a == b always true) in case this.A == null. The if (item == null || this.A == null || item.A == null) test is "overdone" and checks to much, possibly in order to create artificially "high-quality" code. I see this kind of "overchecking" and being overly correct all the time on Code Review.

This answer has many blanket statements such as ...reasonable to assume.... All of this might be true in 99% of the cases but still the ability to retrieve an item from a set can come handy. Real world code cannot always adhere to POLA etc. principles. For example, if you are deduplicating strings case-insensitively you might want to get the "master" item. Dictionary<string, string> is a workaround, but it costs perf.

It is amazingly compatible in practice, and installing an older version side by side is not an issue. Also note, that the .NET BCL is in my estimate 10-100x larger than the Java built-in classes.

Does PHP have a foreach construct? You could do foreach ($i in range(1, count)) (whatever that looks like in PHP). Or something like foreach ($item in array.skip(1)) which is what a C# person would do.

It's entirely possible to have stacks of unlimited size. It's just not that useful so it's often not implemented. The money is better spent elsewhere. Also it forces other disadvantages such as stack overflows turning into out of memory conditions.

I thought you suggested this by saying that the time increases at all but apparently not. I think I misread the text a bit yesterday.

This is the true answer. Rainbow tables do not apply due to the salt. So all that this idea does it create more valid hashes.

You should ask this on security SE.

not significantly increase the time 256x is significant in my mind. And it could be more if he drops more.

@ArukaJ please consider accepting a different answer. This one is the one with the least information. Do not just accept the answer that is highest voted. Choose the most useful one.