|
fritz posted:who wants to see a bunch of words about languages written by a goofus https://plus.google.com/110981030061712822816/posts/KaSKeg4vQtz that's an old one. yegge is the highest functioning retard this side of eliezer yudkowsky
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2015 07:22
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 12, 2024 00:02 |
|
|
https://github.com/dotnet/roslyn/issues/98 C# 7 design discussions
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2015 14:08
|
|
|
triple sulk posted:https://github.com/dotnet/roslyn/issues/98 i can't be the only person kind of impressed to see this. I was talking to mads at Xamarin evolve and he was very excited to do this.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2015 14:49
|
|
|
triple sulk posted:https://github.com/dotnet/roslyn/issues/98
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2015 15:04
|
|
|
quote:switch (o) {
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2015 16:32
|
|
|
Bloody posted:im the missing " I noticed that too when I was reading it lol
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2015 16:34
|
|
|
St Evan Echoes posted:lol they all but just come out and say "there won't be a separate meeting to consider vb, we'll just cram some equivalent features into it at the last minute because who gives a gently caress anyway" this has been the vb.net design methodology from the beginning
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2015 16:34
|
|
|
triple sulk posted:https://github.com/dotnet/roslyn/issues/98 unghhh method contracts are hot.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2015 16:38
|
|
|
Bloody posted:im the missing " What type does o have here? I don't understand this code in a strong static type system.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2015 16:45
|
|
|
Object i guess? or maybe T it has a type that is not known at compile time but is at run time? i don't know anything
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2015 16:56
|
|
|
Shaggar posted:unghhh method contracts are hot.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2015 16:56
|
|
|
gonadic io posted:What type does o have here? I don't understand this code in a strong static type system. Object. all C# types are Objects
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2015 17:14
|
|
|
gonadic io posted:What type does o have here? I don't understand this code in a strong static type system. cmon. in haskell o's type would be an ADT thats a sum of all the types mentioned in the switch statement
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2015 17:37
|
|
|
urgh. loving Docker. I'm trying to like this poo poo but it's such a fuckup project despite starting from a good idea (hey let's just not bother actually verifying digital signatures. you really think somebody would do that? just go on the Internet and tell lies?) foo/Dockerfile: FROM ubungu bar/Dockerfile: FROM ubungu adsfhjfdsa/Dockerfile: FROM ubungu Have you heard the good word of Ubungu Linux??????? don't forget to apt-get update! jfc
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2015 18:14
|
|
|
triple sulk posted:https://github.com/dotnet/roslyn/issues/98 i have never not been excited about a new version of c# where's the extension properties though
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2015 18:33
|
|
|
Flat Daddy posted:cmon. in haskell o's type would be an ADT thats a sum of all the types mentioned in the switch statement well yeah but there didn't seem to be any ADT constructors or anything that would indicate that, it just looked exactly like python's if (o hastype string) then ... else if (o hastype int) then ... or whatever
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2015 19:08
|
|
|
gonadic io posted:well yeah but there didn't seem to be any ADT constructors or anything that would indicate that, it just looked exactly like python's like, for serious, what's the practical reason that matters?
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2015 19:49
|
|
|
Mr Dog posted:urgh. loving Docker. I'm trying to like this poo poo but it's such a fuckup project despite starting from a good idea (hey let's just not bother actually verifying digital signatures. you really think somebody would do that? just go on the Internet and tell lies?) hahah yeah docker only gets good when you keep your repos inhouse dont pull from public
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2015 19:49
|
|
|
Brain Candy posted:Object. all C# types are Objects what about pointer types
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2015 20:04
|
|
|
bomb posted:what about pointer types look at me being wrong and certain
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2015 20:15
|
|
|
gonadic io posted:What type does o have here? I don't understand this code in a strong static type system. any type, remember that C# has reified generics and all types are somewhere in the hierarchy (including void, int, etc.), so it can literally be any type. I suppose if the type can be determined statically at compile time, the switch won't even be compiled, just the branch that matches bomb posted:what about pointer types well gently caress me sideways, any type except for pointers
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2015 21:12
|
|
|
sent this to the php developer evangelist we have http://eev.ee/blog/2012/04/09/php-a-fractal-of-bad-design/ He came back with the 'good developers can use whatever' and a 'curl most sites and you won't see ASP.net being used' C# 7 is looking nice. My body is ready for C# 6, release it Satya. Dirk Pitt fucked around with this message at 21:29 on Jan 28, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2015 21:26
|
|
|
Mr Dog posted:urgh. loving Docker. I'm trying to like this poo poo but it's such a fuckup project despite starting from a good idea (hey let's just not bother actually verifying digital signatures. you really think somebody would do that? just go on the Internet and tell lies?) docker, the daemon that sets up containers on demand via REST api, rules docker, the idiot's model of repeatability using dockerfiles, needs to die
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2015 21:31
|
|
|
the big problem with jenkins is that the guy looks so smug
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2015 22:20
|
|
|
His name is Hudson.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2015 22:22
|
|
|
quote:A developer evangelist is a spokesperson, mediator and translator between a company and both its technical staff and outside developers. I don't understand. How is this a useful position? quote:He came back with the 'good developers can use whatever' and a 'curl most sites and you won't see ASP.net being used These are terrible arguments. I hope you're pointing out that your developers are likely using languages that they are comfortable and productive with and so switching languages to a new one because "reasons" is a terrible idea, and his point about launching a PHP-based product in six weeks is useless anecdotal bullshit? If this guy seriously has the CEO's ear over actual developers, then you might want to look into finding a good exit.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2015 22:48
|
|
|
Cybernetic Vermin posted:the big problem with jenkins is that the guy looks so smug 
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2015 22:59
|
|
|
does anybody actually use unsafe c# for anything
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2015 23:07
|
|
|
thx jeeves
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2015 23:07
|
|
|
Cybernetic Vermin posted:the big problem with jenkins is that the guy looks so smug i think he looks tranquil
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2015 23:12
|
|
|
GrumpyDoctor posted:does anybody actually use unsafe c# for anything interop with C (get a pointer from one thing, pass it to another)
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2015 23:13
|
|
|
Notorious b.s.d. posted:interop with C why wouldn't you just use IntPtrs
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2015 23:29
|
|
|
Notorious b.s.d. posted:(get a pointer from one thing, pass it to another) shhhhhhh, don't let the word get out that this is all we do
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2015 01:01
|
|
|
GrumpyDoctor posted:why wouldn't you just use IntPtrs struct
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2015 06:53
|
|
|
JawnV6 posted:struct if you're talking about unpacking structs then why wouldn't you handle that in the marshaling? it's unsafe in both cases but that way you don't have to put your c# itself into who-knows-what's-going-on mode e: i guess i can see it if there's like a union or something involved raminasi fucked around with this message at 07:06 on Jan 29, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2015 07:04
|
|
|
structs and unions are pretty pleasant in c# marshalling
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2015 07:33
|
|
|
GrumpyDoctor posted:if you're talking about unpacking structs then why wouldn't you handle that in the marshaling? it's unsafe in both cases but that way you don't have to put your c# itself into who-knows-what's-going-on mode i had to use some weird dll before a vendor provided c# bindings, this was 2 years ago and i never do anything right so idk
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2015 08:41
|
|
|
GrumpyDoctor posted:does anybody actually use unsafe c# for anything I have in fact, for direct pixel manipulation of images. it was a tool to build win32 ICOs from a bunch of images, I guess but I'm not terribly sure that I used unsafe memory to examine input images pixel by pixel, and to generate the... unusual bitmap data required by ICO (images in ICOs are not actually transparent, they're old school sprites that are drawn in two stages: an AND mask that draws the opaque part in black, and a XOR mask that fills the black with color data. and the transparent part had better be black in the XOR mask) plus all the resource directory structures that provide the metadata. I'm not sure why I used unsafe code at all, probably just as an exercise I wrote it because I could find no free tool that supported the newer ICOs with embedded 256x256 PNGs, and we needed a cool icon for the one Win32 application I got to write back in 2007. afterwards, I used it to make high resolution icons for MAME games: for the 32x32 and 16x16 resolutions I used a MAME icon library that floated around, but for the 256x256 image I took the game's logo/title screen, cropped and cleaned it up, and the most shocking thing was, most games actually had a lower resolution than 256x256. 80s and early 90s games could literally fit in an icon
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2015 11:43
|
|
|
why do you need to be unsafe for that? you're banging on some byte buffers, that's fine in managed code.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2015 08:35
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 12, 2024 00:02 |
|
|
Subjunctive posted:why do you need to be unsafe for that? you're banging on some byte buffers, that's fine in managed code. because SHUT UP!
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2015 09:52
|
|
