|
i want to avoid dependencies as much as possible cause this is for a javaagent which is why i looked at jaxb at all. probably i hosed up the schema xjc still generates poo poo code though
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2014 21:55
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 22:12 |
|
|
protobuf is a really convoluted method of passing butt = 1
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2014 22:03
|
|
|
the bug i reported is a big deal lol gently caress all yall someone else do my work
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2014 22:06
|
|
|
Kevin Mitnick P.E. posted:i want to avoid dependencies as much as possible cause this is for a javaagent which is why i looked at jaxb at all. probably i hosed up the schema still sucks dick tho yaml4life gently caress json
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2014 22:48
|
|
|
i tried protobufs for a thing once and they were really slow to parse, like barely any faster than xml. i was probably doing something wrong i guess? but if it's that easy to do them wrong then they're probably bad anyway.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2014 23:27
|
|
|
Soricidus posted:i tried protobufs for a thing once and they were really slow to parse, like barely any faster than xml. i was probably doing something wrong i guess? but if it's that easy to do them wrong then they're probably bad anyway. Weird, I've never benchmarked them for speed so the only thing I've got to go on is this: https://code.google.com/p/thrift-protobuf-compare/wiki/Benchmarking We're mostly concerned with the serialized size of the messages and the libraries we need to include to use them.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2014 23:44
|
|
|
Soricidus posted:i tried protobufs for a thing once and they were really slow to parse, like barely any faster than xml. i was probably doing something wrong i guess? but if it's that easy to do them wrong then they're probably bad anyway. if you made a big blob of tiny strings maybe. protobufs are for the string haters club
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2014 00:50
|
|
|
Soricidus posted:i tried protobufs for a thing once and they were really slow to parse, like barely any faster than xml. i was probably doing something wrong i guess? but if it's that easy to do them wrong then they're probably bad anyway. cap'n proto and then mmap
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2014 01:06
|
|
|
if you need it i guess, but blitting pseudo-C structs in 2014 seems like a an allegic reaction to bloat
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2014 01:18
|
|
|
actually, nvm, good joakquote:The encoding allows bytes other than the last to be zero, but some applications (especially ones written in languages that use NUL-terminated strings) may truncate at the first zero. ahahahahha
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2014 01:33
|
|
|
Brain Candy posted:if you need it i guess, but blitting pseudo-C structs in 2014 seems like a an allegic reaction to bloat some googe guys just released flatbuffers too, so i guess it's a thing some people need somewhere protocol buffers are plenty fast for most use cases though
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2014 01:52
|
|
|
Kevin Mitnick P.E. posted:i want to avoid dependencies as much as possible cause this is for a javaagent which is why i looked at jaxb at all. probably i hosed up the schema atleast use this: http://cxf.apache.org/cxf-xjc-plugin.html to generate the source cause its gonna make it easy to repeat your results.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2014 02:47
|
|
|
Shaggar posted:atleast use this: http://cxf.apache.org/cxf-xjc-plugin.html to generate the source cause its gonna make it easy to repeat your results. i'm using some other xjc plugin but yeah. never check in generated code
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2014 02:51
|
|
|
i cast protocol buffs on myself
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2014 03:38
|
|
|
i also used them as a faster smaller alternative to .NET serialization and i have no regrets!
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2014 03:38
|
|
|
Share Bear posted:the bug i reported is a big deal lol gently caress all yall someone else do my work wait, is this related to the earlier JavaScript thing?
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2014 07:25
|
|
|
bumping this thread so some idiot knows where it is
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2014 23:32
|
|
|
butts
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2014 02:13
|
|
|
USSMICHELLEBACHMAN posted:bumping this thread so some idiot knows where it is i'm the idiot
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2014 02:14
|
|
|
tef posted:butts honored to have you posting in my thread 
----------------
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2014 02:15
|
|
|
LARD LORD posted:i'm the idiot i switched to writing the matasano crypto challenges, the first one was okay, second is a little slower going probably some really hideous stuff going on here http://pastebin.com/asRmBHSS Moist von Lipwig fucked around with this message at 02:23 on Jun 27, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2014 02:16
|
|
|
dat brace style i like the look of your code ( i didn't read it though ) it looks like good code
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2014 05:50
|
|
|
i hate any problem that involes mapping values to to other values that's not a problem it's typing
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2014 06:01
|
|
|
well the idea is that the first few problems are library building busy work and then you get into hard stuff later, I'm finding it good practice since I've never written anything below JavaScript before
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2014 06:11
|
|
|
did this get poste here? it's a nice little script injection 101 https://xss-game.appspot.com/
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2014 06:59
|
|
|
USSMICHELLEBACHMAN posted:i hate any problem that involes mapping values to to other values that's not a problem it's typing
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2014 07:26
|
|
|
im the atypical usage of ++/-- as prefixes instead of suffixes
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2014 15:38
|
|
|
Bloody posted:im the atypical usage of ++/-- as prefixes instead of suffixes but its faster here look at the asm...
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2014 16:34
|
|
|
i'm just going based on bjarne stroustrup's book 
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2014 16:41
|
|
|
theres a lot of technically correct things in C++ that nobody should ever do like code c++
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2014 16:43
|
|
|
can't you use stoi
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2014 16:46
|
|
|
Shinku ABOOKEN posted:but its faster here look at the asm... i was told that preincrement was faster than postincrement (i'm sure it's not an issue any more and everything gets optimized away)
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2014 16:49
|
|
|
Socracheese posted:theres a lot of technically correct things in C++ that nobody should ever do C++ doesn't have garbage collection because it would collect itself
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2014 16:53
|
|
|
suffix posted:did this get poste here? it's a nice little script injection 101 Why don't script tags work on level 2?
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2014 16:54
|
|
|
i use postincrement always because imo it looks nicer and if you care about the ordering of side effects or the compiler can't optimize properly because of your side effects then gently caress YOU gently caress YOU gently caress YOU
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2014 17:23
|
|
|
Kevin Mitnick P.E. posted:gently caress YOU gently caress YOU gently caress YOU this is my uncontrollable visceral reaction to c++ and anything c++ related
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2014 17:26
|
|
|
Kevin Mitnick P.E. posted:i use postincrement always because imo it looks nicer and if you care about the ordering of side effects or the compiler can't optimize properly because of your side effects then gently caress YOU gently caress YOU gently caress YOU and I've seen enough compilers to know that it's amazing some of the things you assume they optimise that do not in fact get optimised at all.
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2014 18:15
|
|
|
I always heard that postincrement was the idiomatic choice.
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2014 18:18
|
|
|
Kevin Mitnick P.E. posted:i use postincrement always because imo it looks nicer and if you care about the ordering of side effects or the compiler can't optimize properly because of your side effects then gently caress YOU gently caress YOU gently caress YOU i prefer i++, is it just as valid? i'm just trying to make nice looking code and follow the rules
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2014 18:48
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 22:12 |
|
|
post increment requires the construction of a temporary object, pre doesn't. (and copy elision can't eliminate the temporary)
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2014 19:02
|
|
