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 »

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

quick someone write Tie::INIFile

# ? Sep 23, 2013 13:21

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? Jun 4, 2024 05:48

cowboy beepboop: Feb 24, 2001

Condiv posted:

last time I used it, rust seemed like your average strongly typed language. which is good, gently caress c and c++'s middling type strength.

also, as an absolute beginner to the language, pointers were kind of tough for me (mainly because the program I wrote exposed like 6 compiler bugs), but not anything like the template errors in C++

i haven't hit an compiler bug for ages rust is growing up :3:

it's going to take me a while to wrap my head around lifetimes though. wtf rust.

# ? Sep 23, 2013 13:42

Bloody: Mar 3, 2013

hey serialization nerds just use protobufs

# ? Sep 23, 2013 14:42

minidracula: Dec 22, 2007; boo woo boo

Notorious b.s.d. posted:

we had this discussion earlier, like 100 pages ago. i'm just gonna give the main points here

json schemas are non-standard.

json itself is nonstandard, parsers vary in strictness

interoperability matters. every language/platform has a parser generator library but i don't want to port my fuckin grammar to every platform's parser generator and hope i didn't create subtle bugs

serialisation and deserialisation is one of those things people like to pretend is easy
but it's not

I guess I'll go ahead and agree with all the above, but I still ended up specifying a dumbed-down subset of JSON for an interop log file thing for some hardware because it was pulling enough teeth to do that than to end up with something I felt would be "worse" (i.e. some sort of CSV thing) for my needs. XML would have likely made my known and unknown counterparts freak out even more.

It's bad in at least a few ways (before we even get to potential JSON-badness), but it's what seemed like a compromise between what I wanted and what wouldn't unduly explode brains elsewhere. I already want to change a few things about it, but I'm not sure I'll be able to. Here's hoping. I'll find out soon enough if I can make it slightly less bad.

# ? Sep 23, 2013 15:01

minidracula: Dec 22, 2007; boo woo boo

Otto Skorzeny posted:

bought an impreza outback yesterday, good tymes

I didn't know you moved to Seattle?!

# ? Sep 23, 2013 15:03

Janitor Prime: Jan 22, 2004; PC LOAD LETTER

What da fuck does that mean; Fun Shoe

Bloody posted:

hey serialization nerds just use protobufs

Came here to post this, gently caress your bespoke dtd

# ? Sep 23, 2013 15:31

Pollyanna: Mar 5, 2005; Milk's on them.

Despite Python's appeal to many different communities, you may still wonder "why Python?" or "why teach programming with Python?" Answering these questions is no simple task especially when popular opinion is on the side of more masochistic alternatives such as C++ and Java. However, I think the most direct answer is that programming in Python is simply a lot of fun and more productive.

# ? Sep 23, 2013 16:11

Workaday Wizard: Oct 23, 2009; by Pragmatica

python is ok for quickies but if you want long meaningful relationship go for a member of the c family

# ? Sep 23, 2013 16:17

Pollyanna: Mar 5, 2005; Milk's on them.

Shinku ABOOKEN posted:

python is ok for quickies but if you want long meaningful relationship go for a member of the c family

look at this wrong post

# ? Sep 23, 2013 16:19

double sulk: Jul 2, 2010

use ruby 2.0

# ? Sep 23, 2013 16:21

Pollyanna: Mar 5, 2005; Milk's on them.

roaby

# ? Sep 23, 2013 16:23

Pollyanna: Mar 5, 2005; Milk's on them.

i still need a good tutorial for that one

also what if i dont really want to do web development. im used to like apps and stuff
or is that a retarded idea

# ? Sep 23, 2013 16:23

Shaggar: Apr 26, 2006

use wpf for apps

# ? Sep 23, 2013 16:24

double sulk: Jul 2, 2010

Pollyanna posted:

i still need a good tutorial for that one

also what if i dont really want to do web development. im used to like apps and stuff
or is that a retarded idea

if you want to make real apps you can use php.

# ? Sep 23, 2013 16:29

Zlodo: Nov 25, 2006

Shaggar posted:

use wpf for apps

no use qt

# ? Sep 23, 2013 16:33

Posting Principle: Dec 10, 2011; by Ralp

can i write iphone apps in mostly c++ because objc is terrible poo poo that should have died with nextstep

# ? Sep 23, 2013 16:34

Pollyanna: Mar 5, 2005; Milk's on them.

Shaggar posted:

use wpf for apps

but im on osx

gucci void main posted:

if you want to make real apps you can use php.

pls no

# ? Sep 23, 2013 16:37

Pollyanna: Mar 5, 2005; Milk's on them.

gently caress it ill do web development

# ? Sep 23, 2013 16:37

Shaggar: Apr 26, 2006

Pollyanna posted:

but im on osx

sorry for your lots

# ? Sep 23, 2013 16:38

double riveting: Jul 5, 2013; look at them go

the reason plang people hate xml:

design goal: xml does everything
design outcome: xml does everything badly

it is the php of data serialization.

# ? Sep 23, 2013 16:39

Zlodo: Nov 25, 2006

Pollyanna posted:

but im on osx

use qt wpf is bad anyway

# ? Sep 23, 2013 16:39

Zlodo: Nov 25, 2006

double riveting posted:

the reason plang people hate xml:

design goal: xml does everything
design outcome: xml does everything badly

it is the php of data serialization.

# ? Sep 23, 2013 16:40

Shaggar: Apr 26, 2006

double riveting posted:

the reason plang people hate xml:

design goal: xml does everything
design outcome: xml does everything badly

it is the php of data serialization.

this is wrong. xml does everything well. it just might could be better with what we know now, but the chance of a standard coming around to replace it is non-existant

# ? Sep 23, 2013 16:40

Pollyanna: Mar 5, 2005; Milk's on them.

Zlodo posted:

use qt wpf is bad anyway

ok qt

quote:

Qt is a cross-platform application and UI framework for developers using C++ or QML, a CSS & JavaScript like language. Qt Creator is the supporting Qt IDE.

cool

# ? Sep 23, 2013 16:41

Shaggar: Apr 26, 2006

someone hating xml is a sign they don't understand what they're doing

# ? Sep 23, 2013 16:41

uG: Apr 23, 2003; by Ralp

use Qt with ur favorite plang!

# ? Sep 23, 2013 16:42

Pollyanna: Mar 5, 2005; Milk's on them.

at least xml isnt html

# ? Sep 23, 2013 16:43

Zlodo: Nov 25, 2006

uG posted:

use Qt with ur favorite plang!

no use it with c++
best language with best toolkit

# ? Sep 23, 2013 16:44

Shaggar: Apr 26, 2006

Pollyanna posted:

at least xml isnt html

the best html is xml tho

# ? Sep 23, 2013 16:44

Pollyanna: Mar 5, 2005; Milk's on them.

Shaggar posted:

the best html is xml tho

i remember writing html in notepad back in loving like 2000 and even then i thought it was a pain

ahhhh childhood

# ? Sep 23, 2013 16:45

Pollyanna: Mar 5, 2005; Milk's on them.

also i have bonnie tyler stuck in my head now god dammit

# ? Sep 23, 2013 16:46

MononcQc: May 29, 2007

XML does everything well, except unambiguously representing lists, which needs to be using a format agreed upon for each dtd I guess? Also binary blobs.

# ? Sep 23, 2013 16:46

prefect: Sep 11, 2001; No one, Woodhouse.
No one.; Dead Man’s Band

Pollyanna posted:

also i have bonnie tyler stuck in my head now god dammit

she had a couple of pretty good songs

# ? Sep 23, 2013 16:55

Workaday Wizard: Oct 23, 2009; by Pragmatica

MononcQc posted:

XML does everything well, except unambiguously representing lists, which needs to be using a format agreed upon for each dtd I guess? Also binary blobs.

ummm... just use multiple nodes under a container node?

am i misunderstanding somethign

# ? Sep 23, 2013 16:58

double riveting: Jul 5, 2013; look at them go

MononcQc posted:

XML does everything well, except unambiguously representing lists

that's actually the funniest way of saying "bad serialization format" i've heard in a while.

# ? Sep 23, 2013 16:58

Notorious b.s.d.: Jan 25, 2003; by Reene

suffix posted:

well guess what, those xml interfaces are going to be just as broken and ad-hoc as any json parser.

like one of them ignores any encoding you specify and just reads everything as ISO-8859-15,
and one of them runs a bunch of perl regexes on the input and fails if you have whitespace in a self-closing tag,
and one of them just uses print statements and doesn't escape any output data.

lol nope

# ? Sep 23, 2013 17:01

Notorious b.s.d.: Jan 25, 2003; by Reene

Shinku ABOOKEN posted:

ummm... just use multiple nodes under a container node?

am i misunderstanding somethign

if you want an ordered list, you have to do specify that behavior in your dtd/schema. e.g. an attribute for the ordinal value of each child node

i agree that this is one of the worst of XML's many warts, but, as we have repeated ad infinitum, there is no viable alternative. we must choose between bad (everything but xml) or ugly (xml)

Notorious b.s.d. fucked around with this message at 17:05 on Sep 23, 2013

# ? Sep 23, 2013 17:02

Notorious b.s.d.: Jan 25, 2003; by Reene

Shaggar posted:

someone hating xml is a sign they don't understand what they're doing

i have encountered lots of people who "hate xml" because they prefer a builder pattern or attributes/decorators to having an xml config file and that is ok

hating xml as a format is a sign you just have no. loving. clue.

# ? Sep 23, 2013 17:03

MononcQc: May 29, 2007

Shinku ABOOKEN posted:

ummm... just use multiple nodes under a container node?

am i misunderstanding somethign

code:

<list type="car">
  <item>a</item>
  <item>b</item>
  <item>c</item>
</list>

<list>
  <item type="car">a</item>
  <item type="car">b</item>
  <item type="car">c</item>
</list>

<list>
  <car>a</car>
  <car>b</car>
  <car>c</car>
</list>

<cars>
  <item>a</item>
  <item>b</item>
  <item>c</item>
</cars>

<cars>
  <car>a</car>
  <car>b</car>
  <car>c</car>
</cars>

<car>a</car>
<car>b</car>
<car>c</car>

pick your poison.

It's a well-known XML problem and comes from the fact you try to represent a list from a tree, and there's just plenty of ways to do it. Usually people will then need to define a list as a DTD and you go on from there, each type of document with its own way of writing a list or whatever.

To some extent that's fine because that's what DTDs are for, but yeah. It's still a wart.

# ? Sep 23, 2013 17:07

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? Jun 4, 2024 05:48

Notorious b.s.d.: Jan 25, 2003; by Reene

MononcQc posted:

XML does everything well, except unambiguously representing lists, which needs to be using a format agreed upon for each dtd I guess? Also binary blobs.

xml is a structured document format, accommodating binary blobs well wasn't a design goal. if you have unstructured data, it doesn't belong in xml

that is one wart i can fuckin forgive

# ? Sep 23, 2013 17:08

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

«‹›1784 »