p-lang thread: (now (have you (problems two)))

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Serious Hardware/Software Crap > YOSPOS > p-lang thread: (now (have you (problems two)))

«‹›1784 »

Jonny 290: May 5, 2005; [ASK] me about OS/2 Warp

Cybernetic Vermin posted:

do you feel that your life took a wrong turn at some point?

Actually the balloon story on the Onion got me thinking and i spent a few hours thinking about it last night and i figured out my balloon incident. so yes, i can pinpoint it to spring in third grade. ill write it out later on, i have a shitload of stuff to hit today

# ? Mar 6, 2013 19:53

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? Jun 4, 2024 23:22

skeevy achievements: Feb 25, 2008; by merry exmarx

Cybernetic Vermin posted:

does anyone seriously read source code without specific purpose and direction?

yeah linux source is great if you're like me and weren't forced to write your own OS in school

doom iphone code was great to read out of curiosity to see what programming gamez is like

but like open sores code or work code without a specific need to understand/fix something? lol no

# ? Mar 6, 2013 20:37

Suspicious Dish: Sep 24, 2011; 2020 is the year of linux on the desktop, bro; Fun Shoe

Internaut! posted:

yeah linux source is great if you're like me and weren't forced to build your own OS in school

doom iphone code was great to read out of curiosity to see what programming gamez is like

these are both purposes and directions

# ? Mar 6, 2013 20:37

Squinty Applebottom: Jan 1, 2013

on fridays i curl up with my cats, bottle of wine, and just read source by the fire

# ? Mar 6, 2013 20:49

weird: Jun 4, 2012; by zen death robot

rotor posted:

perl gets an undeservedly bad rap for large software projects.

the limiting factor is the availability of decent perl programmers and people who are willing to write perl well, not anything to do with perl itself. it's sort of a self-fulfilling prophecy when shitheads who dont know gently caress from poo poo start complaining about how you can't write large programs in $LANGUAGE and people start listening to them.

But why would you want to? Perl was designed as a /bin/sh alternative, and most of its featureset reflects that. You can write large projects in Perl, as in any other language, but I don't see many features in it that make it a standout choice for that kind of thing.

Larry Wall posted:

Perl is, in intent, a cleaned up and summarized version of that wonderful semi-natural language known as 'Unix'.

# ? Mar 6, 2013 21:02

weird: Jun 4, 2012; by zen death robot

Carthag posted:

whats a good book on like idiomatic C or whatever. i feel like when i write C sometimes i just mash keywords in a row and delete poo poo until it compiles

I really liked Plauger's book on the implementation of the standard library.

# ? Mar 6, 2013 21:02

b0lt: Apr 29, 2005

rotor posted:

the last two places i've been have had what amounted to nonreplaceable perl infrastructure and were constantly hunting for senior-level perl people and never found them.

idiot posted:

Code repositories and version control are gone. We work on live
sites (Pipelines protects us from stupidity), never document code (it's
legible, that's the point), and focus on the client's business
requirements. We sell them the flexibility upon which they depend.

Required skills:
raw perl (no modules), javascript, building web-sites using some kind of
templating language (e.g. template toolkit).

You must hate version control systems, we won't be using any. You must
hate commenting and documenting code, it's redundant to anyone who can read
the code. You must hate block-style css, it over-abstracts layout. You
must hate optmizing code or writing efficient code, that's not the point.
Everything we do here prioritizes the ability for the client to make
changes. That's the only speed that counts.

# ? Mar 6, 2013 21:15

uG: Apr 23, 2003; by Ralp

VanillaKid posted:

But why would you want to? Perl was designed as a /bin/sh alternative, and most of its featureset reflects that. You can write large projects in Perl, as in any other language, but I don't see many features in it that make it a standout choice for that kind of thing.

Said the only person in the world who has never heard of CPAN

# ? Mar 6, 2013 21:18

Cocoa Crispies: Jul 20, 2001; Vehicular Manslaughter!; Pillbug

VanillaKid posted:

But why would you want to? Perl was designed as a /bin/sh alternative, and most of its featureset reflects that.

it's not a /bin/sh alternative so much as a sed/grep/ack alternative, and as perl people did more with it they grew the language until about twenty years ago when they just kind of gave up changing it ever again

# ? Mar 6, 2013 21:22

rotor: Jun 11, 2001; classic case of pineapple derangement syndrome

VanillaKid posted:

But why would you want to? Perl was designed as a /bin/sh alternative, and most of its featureset reflects that. You can write large projects in Perl, as in any other language, but I don't see many features in it that make it a standout choice for that kind of thing.

you know, now that you've asked, i dont really know. i dont know why you'd want to use perl for producing web pages, it's not well-suited for text handling or manipulating character streams or doing things with files.

# ? Mar 6, 2013 21:24

Cocoa Crispies: Jul 20, 2001; Vehicular Manslaughter!; Pillbug

rotor posted:

you know, now that you've asked, i dont really know. i dont know why you'd want to use perl for producing web pages, it's not well-suited for text handling or manipulating character streams or doing things with files.

perl wasn't particularly ubiquitous in 1995 and never had a good library for handling cgi environment variables and http headers either

# ? Mar 6, 2013 21:26

Blotto Skorzany: Nov 7, 2008; He's a PSoC, loose and runnin'
came the whisper from each lip
And he's here to do some business with
the bad ADC on his chip
bad ADC on his chiiiiip

I wouldn't say that the language stopped moving at 5.0 or 5.6/5.8. Since about 2007 the pace of Perl 5 development picked up again (not to mention the large changes in best practices that happened in the early 2000s) and they're releasing a new version every year now, with reasonably large changes. 5.16 is considerably different from 5.6/5.8 that a bunch of folks are frozen on for a lot of pretty basic things.

# ? Mar 6, 2013 21:27

Blotto Skorzany: Nov 7, 2008; He's a PSoC, loose and runnin'
came the whisper from each lip
And he's here to do some business with
the bad ADC on his chip
bad ADC on his chiiiiip

incidentally this kick in the pants to perl 5 was spurred by people giving up on perl 6 and barfing at jumping ship to ruby

# ? Mar 6, 2013 21:28

weird: Jun 4, 2012; by zen death robot

rotor posted:

you know, now that you've asked, i dont really know. i dont know why you'd want to use perl for producing web pages, it's not well-suited for text handling or manipulating character streams or doing things with files.

Right, Perl's good at being the Unix shell on steroids. I guess I just assumed large scale web development was more than munging text??? idk I don't care about web development. Since the question was contrasting Perl with C, I figured we were more talking about applications programming anyway

# ? Mar 6, 2013 21:40

uG: Apr 23, 2003; by Ralp

What world class ORM does C have?

# ? Mar 6, 2013 21:41

Sweeper: Nov 29, 2007; The Joe Buck of Posting; Dinosaur Gum

i have a java problem cause im dumb and dont know java

i have an interface, and i want one of the functions to take an argument with the type of the implementing class

what is this called, idk how to google it. i have a weird hodgepodge of generic templating going on, but i have a couple unchecked casts so i think im missing something

ex:

public class Foo implements Bar {
// from Bar
public void do(Foo foo) { /* do something with Foo type */ }
}

public interface Bar {
public void do(<ImplementingType> foo);
}

what am i doing wrong with my design people smarter than me??

# ? Mar 6, 2013 21:43

Cocoa Crispies: Jul 20, 2001; Vehicular Manslaughter!; Pillbug

uG posted:

What world class ORM does C have?

C doesn't have language-level support for Os, nobody wants to write an ORM for it

# ? Mar 6, 2013 21:47

rotor: Jun 11, 2001; classic case of pineapple derangement syndrome

VanillaKid posted:

Right, Perl's good at being the Unix shell on steroids. I guess I just assumed large scale web development was more than munging text???

yeah, there's also databases

# ? Mar 6, 2013 21:47

Cocoa Crispies: Jul 20, 2001; Vehicular Manslaughter!; Pillbug

Sweeper posted:

i have a java problem cause im dumb and dont know java

i have an interface, and i want one of the functions to take an argument with the type of the implementing class

what is this called, idk how to google it. i have a weird hodgepodge of generic templating going on, but i have a couple unchecked casts so i think im missing something

ex:

public class Foo implements Bar {
// from Bar
public void do(Foo foo) { /* do something with Foo type */ }
}

public interface Bar {
public void do(<ImplementingType> foo);
}

what am i doing wrong with my design people smarter than me??

your design is probably wrong, because you can't do that with an interface contract

is there any reason you can't do with another implementer of the interface?

# ? Mar 6, 2013 21:48

Sweeper: Nov 29, 2007; The Joe Buck of Posting; Dinosaur Gum

Cocoa Crispies posted:

your design is probably wrong, because you can't do that with an interface contract

is there any reason you can't do with another implementer of the interface?

yea its definitely a design issue im not seeing an easy way to fix it and i dont care enough about unchecked casts to the concrete type to fix it :v:

basically I refer to objects as Bars, but one of the functions of Bar needs to be the concrete type because it needs properties of the concrete type. the problem is the properties aren't generic between concrete types

edit:
im doing a genetic algorithm of source for optimization and i made it all generic, but i need to do the crossover with concrete classes

Sweeper fucked around with this message at 21:55 on Mar 6, 2013

# ? Mar 6, 2013 21:52

MeruFM: Jul 27, 2010

You can somewhat force it with generics.

Sweeper posted:

code:

public class Foo implements Bar<Foo> {
   // from Bar
   public void do(Foo foo) { /* do something with Foo type */ }
}

public interface Bar<T extends Bar<T>> {
   public void do(T foo);
}

But then it also lets you use Bar<Baz> instead of Bar<Foo>.

# ? Mar 6, 2013 22:04

raminasi: Jan 25, 2005; a last drink with no ice

Sweeper posted:

what am i doing wrong with my design people

why do you need do to be in the interface

# ? Mar 6, 2013 22:06

JewKiller 3000: Nov 28, 2006; by Lowtax

Sweeper posted:

one of the functions of Bar needs to be the concrete type because it needs properties of the concrete type. the problem is the properties aren't generic between concrete types

then don't put them in the generic interface?

efb god dammit

# ? Mar 6, 2013 22:08

Sweeper: Nov 29, 2007; The Joe Buck of Posting; Dinosaur Gum

JewKiller 3000 posted:

then don't put them in the generic interface?

efb god dammit

its a generic operation that happens with a specific type :v:

# ? Mar 6, 2013 22:11

Sweeper: Nov 29, 2007; The Joe Buck of Posting; Dinosaur Gum

hah i know how to fix it nvm im dumb, just not going to refer to them as the interface type and use a generic type which implements the interface

# ? Mar 6, 2013 22:20

Sweeper: Nov 29, 2007; The Joe Buck of Posting; Dinosaur Gum

dont do drugs

# ? Mar 6, 2013 22:20

Sweeper: Nov 29, 2007; The Joe Buck of Posting; Dinosaur Gum

kidding do all the drugs

# ? Mar 6, 2013 22:20

FlapYoJacks: Feb 12, 2009

Cocoa Crispies posted:

C doesn't have language-level support for Os, nobody wants to write an ORM for it

It may not, but I still program it with Os in mind.

# ? Mar 6, 2013 22:53

Gazpacho: Jun 18, 2004; by Fluffdaddy; Slippery Tilde

Cocoa Crispies posted:

sed/grep/ack

# ? Mar 6, 2013 22:56

Jonny 290: May 5, 2005; [ASK] me about OS/2 Warp

sling that poo poo boy

temp code, dont hate.
poo poo works
chuggin thru some xml arrays

code:

sub FindandReplace() {
	my @actionarr = @_;
	my %actionhash = %{shift @actionarr};
        my $actiontag = $actionhash{'id'};
        shift @actionarr;
        my $file = @{shift @actionarr}[2];
            my %replacehash;
        while ($actionarr[0] ne "apd") {
        shift @actionarr;
        my $from = @{shift @actionarr}[2];
        shift @actionarr;
        my $to = @{shift @actionarr}[2];
        $replacehash{$from} = $to;
        }
        foreach (keys %replacehash) {
        $replaces{$actiontag}{$file}{$_} = $replacehash{$_};
        }
        shift @actionarr;
        push(@apds, @{shift @actionarr}[2]);
	
}

it looks gross for now but fortunately that will chop down about 50% once i spend some time on it

# ? Mar 6, 2013 23:17

uG: Apr 23, 2003; by Ralp

I'm the foreach loop that should be $replaces{$actiontag}{$file} = $replacehash; or map {$replaces{$actiontag}{$file}{$_} = $replacehash{$_} } keys %$replacehash; (or something)

# ? Mar 6, 2013 23:30

Jonny 290: May 5, 2005; [ASK] me about OS/2 Warp

there is a possibility that we'd have to run it multiple times if there are multi lines with same ID and file, I was just dancing to make sure we didn't overwrite old hashes. its pretty mind bending to go this deep but i'm coping ok

# ? Mar 6, 2013 23:34

Nomnom Cookie: Aug 30, 2009

Jonny 290 posted:

sling that poo poo boy

temp code, dont hate.
poo poo works
chuggin thru some xml arrays

code:


sub FindandReplace() {
	my @actionarr = @_;
	my %actionhash = %{shift @actionarr};
        my $actiontag = $actionhash{'id'};
        shift @actionarr;
        my $file = @{shift @actionarr}[2];
            my %replacehash;
        while ($actionarr[0] ne "apd") {
        shift @actionarr;
        my $from = @{shift @actionarr}[2];
        shift @actionarr;
        my $to = @{shift @actionarr}[2];
        $replacehash{$from} = $to;
        }
        foreach (keys %replacehash) {
        $replaces{$actiontag}{$file}{$_} = $replacehash{$_};
        }
        shift @actionarr;
        push(@apds, @{shift @actionarr}[2]);
	
}

it looks gross for now but fortunately that will chop down about 50% once i spend some time on it

XML processing? U need xslt

# ? Mar 6, 2013 23:38

Jonny 290: May 5, 2005; [ASK] me about OS/2 Warp

I have XML::Parser, and that is it.

this is due on 15th by COB, it would take 8-12 months to get a single perl module added to 10,500 walmart servers

# ? Mar 6, 2013 23:43

uG: Apr 23, 2003; by Ralp

You could just ship/include everything in local::lib with the project or some poo poo.

or do it all in regex

# ? Mar 6, 2013 23:55

Jonny 290: May 5, 2005; [ASK] me about OS/2 Warp

uG posted:

You could just ship/include everything in local::lib with the project or some poo poo.

or do it all in regex

oh god the regex based parser i was working on yesterday
aaaaa
anyways their poo poo's super locked down and stuff like inlined/slipstreamed/whatever modules and libs will deffo fail code review. i wish i could just do that stuff and be done with it

# ? Mar 6, 2013 23:56

Cybernetic Vermin: Apr 18, 2005

just got a paper about perl regexes accepted at a conference, i am now indebted to larry.

# ? Mar 7, 2013 00:00

tef: May 30, 2004; -> some l-system crap ->

Sweeper posted:

kidding do all the drugs

then regret it and post stories about hosed up people

# ? Mar 7, 2013 00:05

tef: May 30, 2004; -> some l-system crap ->

Nomnom Cookie posted:

XML processing? U need xslt

xslt is pretty neat but that's really cos of xpath. xpath is neat as hell.

# ? Mar 7, 2013 00:06

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? Jun 4, 2024 23:22

tef: May 30, 2004; -> some l-system crap ->

Jonny 290 posted:

anyways their poo poo's super locked down and stuff like inlined/slipstreamed/whatever modules and libs will deffo fail code review. i wish i could just do that stuff and be done with it

this is going to sound hilariously bad, but what about you write some perl scripts to write perl scripts :2bong:

what I mean is that you can basically compile xpaths into perl code using xml::parser. autogenerated stuff will probably pass code review, cos it will look pretty much like what you have already

# ? Mar 7, 2013 00:09

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Serious Hardware/Software Crap > YOSPOS > p-lang thread: (now (have you (problems two)))

«‹›1784 »