|
Cocoa Crispies posted:aaaanyways Unless you're netflix and you suck the silverlight dick for DRM
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2012 20:21
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 13:06 |
|
|
Cocoa Crispies posted:how do i have to use poo poo languages I was more saying that those other languages aren't poo poo but then I remembered all languages are poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2012 20:31
|
|
|
FamDav posted:I was more saying that those other languages aren't poo poo but then I remembered all languages are poo poo. every language is poo poo but some of them are less poo poo at a particular thing html is a nice dialect of xml for structured documents, haml is a human-readable language for making the structure part, and markdown is a nice language for the document part css is a good way to put attributes on a structured document, sass is a good way to write css with a few extra features that make it more powerful javascript is lisp but everyone already has it installed and runs a mostly-compatible version of it, and coffeescript fixes the hosed up syntax it's poo poo and lmao that there's this little set of languages that exist to make the standards a bit more palatable but at least they're open and not proprietary and so on
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2012 20:35
|
|
|
coffeescript does nothing but gently caress up javascript's already thoroughly acceptable syntax. if someone wants to use coffeescript they probably also use ruby and should be jettisoned immediately
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2012 20:59
|
|
|
also markdown is godawful. try to put a code snippet inside a list
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2012 21:00
|
|
|
use restructed text except the lack of apps suck
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2012 21:05
|
|
|
0xB16B00B5 posted:use restructed text except the lack of apps suck tbqh markdown, restructured text, etc. are all great for prose in all the ways html and haml suck at it as long as you use one of them you're good
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2012 21:07
|
|
|
I wish someone would make a godawful symbiosis of markdown, ReST, and org for the ultimate markup language
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2012 21:08
|
|
|
WHOIS John Galt posted:I wish someone would make a godawful symbiosis of markdown, ReST, and org for the ultimate markup language lots of people at work looooove org-mode
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2012 21:11
|
|
|
Cocoa Crispies posted:lots of people at work looooove org-mode it is insanely powerful, and since you can write code in most languages, within an org document, to modify the org document, it's turing complete but it's terribly loving written as is most emacs lisp
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2012 21:13
|
|
|
WHOIS John Galt posted:it is insanely powerful, and since you can write code in most languages, within an org document, to modify the org document, it's turing complete markdown was rpetty terribly fuckign written too, perl by a non-pro (gruber) language is dece though, there's enough good implementations
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2012 21:17
|
|
|
you can only have three priorities and the highest one has to be alphabetically earlier than the lowest one sounds like a well-designed tool to me
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2012 21:17
|
|
|
yaoi prophet posted:you can only have three priorities and the highest one has to be alphabetically earlier than the lowest one nope, you can change the meaning of priorities with a header #+PRIORITIES: A D H I T C B Y okay they have to be in alpha order but who cares
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2012 21:25
|
|
|
Cocoa Crispies posted:2) portability: i can make the same app work in windows xp, mac os x 10.8 mountain lion, ios, and the tiny subset of androids that have working web browsers, with appropriate layouts for different screen sizes, without a ton of extra effort on my part none of these advantages are unique to webapps or even easier with webapps also extra lols at: #3 and Shaggar
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2012 21:30
|
|
|
Cocoa Crispies posted:coffeescript lmbo
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2012 21:31
|
|
|
WHOIS John Galt posted:nope, you can change the meaning of priorities with a header it's kind of annoying that i can't have name-based priorities but oh well
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2012 21:34
|
|
|
yaoi prophet posted:it's kind of annoying that i can't have name-based priorities but oh well i've had an idea for org 2.0 on the backburner since early this year, huge rewrites of all the bullshit terrible exporting code, built in blogging platform with deployment and preview support, etc etc. maybe we should make a roadmap or something
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2012 21:35
|
|
|
WHOIS John Galt posted:i've had an idea for org 2.0 on the backburner since early this year, huge rewrites of all the bullshit terrible exporting code, built in blogging platform with deployment and preview support, etc etc. maybe we should make a roadmap or something i would work on this if i wasn't allergic to lisp  it's seriously one of the things that made me consider sublime text for a while until i realized the haskell support is abysmal although i'm not sure why you'd want to blog your todo list/notes
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2012 21:40
|
|
|
Tiny Bug Child posted:also markdown is godawful. try to put a code snippet inside a list idk why i'd even want to do that
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2012 21:40
|
|
|
rotor posted:none of these advantages are unique to webapps or even easier with webapps i can make a webapp work on ie7 and ios easier than i can not what's the magic way to make native apps that can do that
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2012 21:45
|
|
|
Cocoa Crispies posted:i can make a webapp work on ie7 and ios easier than i can not use java or c#? edit: oh, ios? i dont know, i guess that's an issue, but that's an issue because webapps have become the standard.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2012 21:47
|
|
|
Tiny Bug Child posted:also markdown is godawful. try to put a code snippet inside a list - <code>shaggar jr</code>
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2012 21:47
|
|
|
air would have been pretty great except adobe
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2012 21:48
|
|
|
rotor posted:use java or c#? lol, how does that work for windows xp, ios, and android
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2012 21:49
|
|
|
i edited my post, you oaf
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2012 21:49
|
|
|
oafin' not double checkin like u should
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2012 21:51
|
|
|
ooooooooo
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2012 21:52
|
|
|
rotor posted:webapps have become the standard. yeah and that's kind of it .net and java client "platforms" (winforms, wpf, the web today is a generally accepted set of stuff that works and some nebulous "html5" stuff that only works in chrome but every os vendor is working on making their implementation the best: see microsoft's tv ads about internet explorer, google's passive-aggressive nagging about chrome, ios safari's constant improvement, etc. surprise everyone competing to do the same thing better than everyone else wins
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2012 21:54
|
|
|
Cocoa Crispies posted:yeah and that's kind of it the browser is not the default application container because it was technically better than everything else. the browser is the default application container because users are lazy and back when the defacto standards were emerging, security trumped basically everything because Windows and app sandboxing wasn't well implemented, which meant that nothing could run locally and the browser was the only thing that offered this environment. Acting like HTML layouts and GUIs are somehow superior to the various java, qt or c# toolkits is simply wrong. Html layouts are lovely and the fact that they're as good as they are (ie not very) is a testament to a decade of vast amount of effort dumped into workarounds and thirdparty libraries.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2012 22:03
|
|
|
im not arguing that its not the standard. Im arguing that it's a poo poo standard.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2012 22:04
|
|
|
rotor posted:none of these advantages are unique to webapps or even easier with webapps except for all of them please don't try to claim that any native "application" can match the portability of a web app. even using that term for native junk is gross
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2012 22:16
|
|
|
rotor posted:Acting like HTML layouts and GUIs are somehow superior to the various java, qt or c# toolkits is simply wrong. they are superior though, b/c you can crap one out and it'll work on browsers everywhere.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2012 22:17
|
|
|
rotor posted:im not arguing that its not the standard. Im arguing that it's a poo poo standard. oh yeah, but x86-64 is a poo poo standard but that doesn't mean you can't build something decent on top of it with enough libraries and compilers been using twitter bootstrap quite a bit, been meaning to try bourbon + neat though
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2012 22:18
|
|
|
Tiny Bug Child posted:please don't try to claim that any native "application" can match the portability of a web app this is too lazy and obvious even for you
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2012 22:42
|
|
|
this discuss is fuckin pointless because again the only reason web apps are so ubiquitous is because of ad-based monetization and data portability and they don't offer any major advantages beyond that vOv
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2012 22:44
|
|
|
Otto Skorzeny posted:this is too lazy and obvious even for you wtf do you think could possibly be more portable than a web app? the only thing that could even come close (and it isn't actually close) is java, which has the additional benefits of making your app look and run like poo poo
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2012 22:46
|
|
|
basically developers should hate anything "native". the idea that it's somehow a good thing is laughable
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2012 22:47
|
|
|
Tiny Bug Child posted:basically developers should hate anything "native". custer: the first coder
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2012 22:50
|
|
|
abraham linksys posted:this discuss is fuckin pointless because again the only reason web apps are so ubiquitous is because of ad-based monetization and data portability and they don't offer any major advantages beyond that vOv web apps are actually awful for data portability, but there's lots of money in charging for them
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2012 22:50
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 13:06 |
|
|
Cocoa Crispies posted:oh yeah, but x86-64 is a poo poo standard but that doesn't mean you can't build something decent on top of it with enough libraries and compilers huh might be because it's designed for compilers not humans
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2012 22:55
|
|