|
how do i do dynamic interactive content without js? or alternately with minimal js? im obviously using c# mvc because im not an idiot.
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2014 21:28
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 01:08 |
|
|
Shaggar posted:like you people talk about writing loads of js but I just cant think of any scenario where thats a valid thing to do. html5 canvas is very attractive
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2014 21:29
|
|
|
shaggar is saying that he uses something that magically generates ur js exactly as you need it which is believable if you want your product to look straight out of the 90s i guess
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2014 21:29
|
|
|
USSMICHELLEBACHMAN posted:which is believable if you want your product to look straight out of the 90s i guess well he does advocate testing on ie8
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2014 21:32
|
|
|
Bloody posted:how do i do dynamic interactive content without js? or alternately with minimal js? im obviously using c# mvc because im not an idiot. depends on what ur trying to do. if its client side then you can write some knockout to do stuff like add fields to forms or whatever. if its server side just do an ajax call w/ html.ajaxform or w/e to return a partial view with the new content. Symbolic Butt posted:html5 canvas is very attractive canvas is for quirky html5 demo sites, not for real webzones. USSMICHELLEBACHMAN posted:shaggar is saying that he uses something that magically generates ur js exactly as you need it javascript doesn't have anything to do with look. or atleast it shouldn't.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2014 21:33
|
|
|
Shaggar posted:
javascript shouldn't have anything to do with anything. unfortunately it does.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2014 21:34
|
|
|
Shaggar posted:Models are just obejcts that hold data. They should be super simple. Like properties only here no logic allowed!!!! ugh no logic goes in the model. controllers are supposed to be thin
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2014 21:35
|
|
|
USSMICHELLEBACHMAN posted:is it as bad as coffeescript coffeescript (afaik) doesn't try to do much, just polish up js's syntax typescript adds strict typing, namespaces, classes, interfaces, generics, access modifiers, C#-style accessors, fixes this and a bunch of other things. its got full js interop, and as a bonus most libraries can be made type safe by providing an interface definition file. because it's subject to the dual constraints of a) being a superset of js b) compiling to idiomatic js there're a fair few warts. most major ones are that you have to fully qualify references to other classes or modules, you have to qualify references to other class members with this, overloading fukkin suckks, one-class-per-file is doable but a pain, and VS's refactorings don't work properly with it yet. also ECMAScript 6 is scheduled for December and that's supposed to have a lot of the stuff typescript currently crowbars in. Shaggar posted:canvas is for quirky html5 demo sites, not for real webzones.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2014 21:44
|
|
|
Tiny Bug Child posted:ugh no logic goes in the model. controllers are supposed to be thin wrong
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2014 22:03
|
|
|
coffeetable posted:coffeescript (afaik) doesn't try to do much, just polish up js's syntax d3 is non-terrible ive heard
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2014 22:03
|
|
|
oh hey i did javascript+canvas visualized data! did you know? html formatted emails are a BITCH MOTHERFUCKIING SHITFUCKFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFfffffffffffffffffffffffffffff
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2014 22:04
|
|
|
So what you're saying is there are many arguments for what goes in what on mvc????
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2014 22:07
|
|
|
Bloody posted:wrong m(vvm)c bitches
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2014 22:09
|
|
|
Luigi Thirty posted:So what you're saying is there are many arguments for what goes in what on mvc???? no there are people who understand what mvc is (shaggar, me) and people who are idiot troll hellfucks (tiny bug idiot)
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2014 22:11
|
|
|
Tiny Bug Child posted:well he does advocate testing on ie8 you should really test against ie8 if you're company makes a couple tens of billions. otherwise youre probably fine with skipping it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2014 22:11
|
|
|
Bloody posted:no you're agreeing with shaggar but arguing with tiny bug childe. god who do i believe!!!!
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2014 22:13
|
|
|
if someone is using ie8, you don't want them as a customer anyhow
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2014 22:13
|
|
|
Luigi Thirty posted:you're agreeing with shaggar but arguing with tiny bug childe. shaggar
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2014 22:13
|
|
|
USSMICHELLEBACHMAN posted:if someone is using ie8, you don't want them as a customer anyhow unless they're a business
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2014 22:13
|
|
|
lol if you don't turn away potential customers because they're not hip enough
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2014 22:14
|
|
|
all you're logic should go in the model because what better thing to perform validations on itself than the thing itself
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2014 22:14
|
|
|
USSMICHELLEBACHMAN posted:all you're logic should go in the model because what better thing to perform validations on itself than the thing itself fat models are better than fat controllers. a little bit of view logic is fine too. it's all poo poo in the end anyway. 
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2014 22:19
|
|
|
there is a clear distinction of what belongs in the model, view, or controller. i sit and think about it real hard, and then i put it in one of those three places, and if you dont put it in the same place you are a lovely coder
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2014 22:21
|
|
|
fat models, fat controllers imo. or multiple controllers for controlling different things
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2014 22:22
|
|
|
Bloody posted:d3 is non-terrible ive heard D3 is nice but anything fancier than a chart with some hover elements still requires writing OO js. I cannot wrap my head around var and this, function f() and var F = function() the worst one is "this" which seems to do entirely different things depending on where you're calling it from. this thread was made for me
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2014 00:01
|
|
|
MeruFM posted:the worst one is "this" which seems to do entirely different things depending on where you're calling it from. 
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2014 00:14
|
|
|
no fat models
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2014 00:32
|
|
|
tbh the only logic i ever remember filling in on a model where one field, if not given, had to be calculated from something and saved there, otherwise i p much never did any logic on it
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2014 00:33
|
|
|
real models have curves
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2014 00:43
|
|
|
double sulk posted:fat models are better than fat controllers. a little bit of view logic is fine too. it's all poo poo in the end anyway. thin models, thin controllers, fit easy to test service and form objects
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2014 01:29
|
|
|
i mean i think every code would be better with less code in it, but the fact is you need to put all that code somewhere
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2014 01:34
|
|
|
USSMICHELLEBACHMAN posted:i mean i think every code would be better with less code in it, but the fact is you need to put all that code somewhere fat dtos between skinny models and skinny viewmodels
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2014 02:03
|
|
|
what is a good book on asp.net mvc i just taught myself using lots of trail & error & some stackoverflow and i think i make the worst mvc apps in the world
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2014 09:53
|
|
|
double sulk posted:fat models are better than fat controllers. a little bit of view logic is fine too. it's all poo poo in the end anyway. no and no and you're missing the point. this is correct. true. 
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2014 19:28
|
|
|
St Evan Echoes posted:what is a good book on asp.net mvc http://www.asp.net/mvc
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2014 23:24
|
|
|
speaking of books, is there a good java/object orientated intro book for dumb functional plangers such as myself?
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2014 05:32
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2014 06:03
|
|
|
Welsper posted:speaking of books, is there a good java/object orientated intro book for dumb functional plangers such as myself? objects are a poor man's closures closures are a poor man's object inshaggar'allah
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2014 14:24
|
|
|
all logic belongs in the controller. if you have logic in the model then it can have effects on the controller and view and you don't want that. you want the model to just be dumb data that you pass around. it can have metadata (annotations/attributes) for validation and stuff, but not logic. code that retrieves the model from the database is an extension of the controller, not the model. Do not loving use orms ever. do not use entity framework outside of statement mapping (which it still doesn't do great)
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2014 14:37
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 01:08 |
|
|
shaggar did I read you saying it's better to set up all your queries on sql server as stored procedures and then just exec from your app?
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2014 14:56
|
|