|
you have come to a world called page 643
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2016 11:06
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 15:48 |
|
|
I wrote a flaky test the other day and I'm not really motivated to fix it
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2016 11:07
|
|
|
craisins posted:jekyll's requirements are ruby, rubygems, node, and python. jesus christ. still, they do work pretty well once you've configured them and it's much more relaxing to have your site served by S3 than having to hand-hold some wordpress installation that's always in a semi-broken state
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2016 12:00
|
|
|
jfc how did anyone ever get anything done when they had to look at documentation and couldn't just google repeatedly until you find the one russian guy on stack overflow who knows that oh yeah actually microsoft suggest this as an approach but if you use it it will actually gently caress up everything else because they didn't finish it as it was too hard
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2016 12:12
|
|
|
Powerful Two-Hander posted:jfc how did anyone ever get anything done when they had to look at documentation and couldn't just google repeatedly until you find the one russian guy on stack overflow who knows that oh yeah actually microsoft suggest this as an approach but if you use it it will actually gently caress up everything else because they didn't finish it as it was too hard yeah it's called entity framework
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2016 13:51
|
|
|
Im going through the asp.net mvc tutorials and on the one hand its all cool and good because C#, but it does seem like a whole lot of magic is happening which is kinda scary. But as a terrible programmer i should probably just let it do its thing, as its no doubt smarter and better at it than i am.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2016 14:50
|
|
|
Powerful Two-Hander posted:jfc how did anyone ever get anything done when they had to look at documentation and couldn't just google repeatedly until you find the one russian guy on stack overflow who knows that oh yeah actually microsoft suggest this as an approach but if you use it it will actually gently caress up everything else because they didn't finish it as it was too hard after having to maintain a codebase that was mostly written before SO existed by people who used big books for everything, if it's not in the book you make an incredibly elaborate bullshit re-implementation of it yourself.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2016 15:13
|
|
|
Charlie Mopps posted:Im going through the asp.net mvc tutorials and on the one hand its all cool and good because C#, but it does seem like a whole lot of magic is happening which is kinda scary. But as a terrible programmer i should probably just let it do its thing, as its no doubt smarter and better at it than i am. mvc is real good and theres no magic going on unless you're using asp.net 5/mvc 6 which uses the new dependency injection stuff which is magic
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2016 16:11
|
|
|
lol at Jekyll, why would someone think that a good idea
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2016 16:44
|
|
|
Parallel Paraplegic posted:after having to maintain a codebase that was mostly written before SO existed by people who used big books for everything, if it's not in the book you make an incredibly elaborate bullshit re-implementation of it yourself. This is what I"m dealing with right now and it hurts so bad. Our original client was written long before the concept of MVC or anything like it existed. On some of our things (like editing peoples coverages, or editing claims), we have these applications that are composed of several COM controls displayed in a tab view (remember, this is all in VB6). When our original client framework was designed, the framework team designed it so whenever you left a COM control, all its fields were validated and saved to the server first. This was excellent behavior for the medical side of things. For things like coverage or claim, however, we found users were constantly crossreferencing between tabs and the constant validation messages when they left a control that was incomplete were really annoying. This is when a brilliant soul engineered the "manager". What's the manager? It's a VB6 class that contains a big wad of "mnemonics", which is to say a key-value collection where the keys are aliases for control names (like text controls and whatnot), and the values are the data in them. This class intercepts "validate" events from the framework and ignores them, so that you can switch between tabs without validating, and the data isn't saved to the server. Then when you actually close the whole claim or coverage application, the manager fires off validation and storage of all the controls. It's kind of like a controller, except that it's part of the client rather than distinct from it. This wouldn't be a problem, except that in the intervening years we've obviously had to add more and more data elements to these applications and the validation becomes more complex (and the mnemonics more obtuse). Then other people get the brilliant idea to refactor the validation into different files based on what's being validated. Which is great, except that they made bad assumptions about how future data elements would be added, making it effectively impossible to add new validation in the manager. Which led to people hard-coding some validation into individual COM controls or into library files that are packaged with them, while trying to add others to the manager, and now today debugging a validation issue (or trying to add new validation) often involves stepping through code across 10+ VB6 files before you find where things are loving up. For this garbage, I typically write 2-3 lines of code for every 10 hours spent interacting with it. Mercifully, we're throwing it away and starting over now that we have a modern C#-based controller framework to do that stuff for our new client. Never mind that the model is MUMPS and the view is javascript being served through IE embedded in a COM browserview (for now), it's MVC dammit. At least the browserview thing will go away eventually. We just didn't want to force users to sometimes launch an actual browser to access web stuff when some of their other workflows are still in the vb6 client.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2016 17:23
|
|
|
LeftistMuslimObama posted:Our original client was written long before the concept of MVC or anything like it existed. must be pretty cool working on a 1970s web client
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2016 18:10
|
|
|
Soricidus posted:must be pretty cool working on a 1970s web client Like 1998. And that old stuff is all VB6. Granted, I'm not a historian, but I thought the pattern of more strict separation between the actual UI and "intermediate logic" into a view and controller was a more modern idea. Of course, I was 10 when this framework was designed, so maybe it was just designed by terrible programmers and I'm too young to know the difference  .
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2016 18:14
|
|
|
MVC was originally developed in the 70s
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2016 18:32
|
|
|
as a general rule it's safe to assume that any good computer idea was developed by the 1970s at latest the last few decades have just consisted of ancient ideas gradually trickling into the mainstream, which promptly reinvents them badly but with javascript and yaml
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2016 19:20
|
|
|
or thinks they've come up with a really clever idea but in fact it has existed for 50 years
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2016 19:31
|
|
|
if you haven't seen it before, you should skim through the Mother of All Demos: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yJDv-zdhzMY basically everything a modern computer does, in 1968.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2016 19:36
|
|
|
i submitted a pretty decent bug report (IMO) but apparently the ruby forum software uses markdown which I did not realize and I formatted my code nicely with ruby comments and i cant edit my post for some reason and it's ruined https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/11970
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2016 19:37
|
|
|
claiming everything interesting happened in the 70's is a lot like gauss making GBS threads all over any younger mathematician "oh i came up with that when I was 15 and it was a dead end" like gently caress you gauss, non-euclidean geometry is a hundred years behind where it could've been it's trivially true that RNN's have been around forever, but they were useless toys for decades and computing advances has made them Actually Useful on Actual Problems
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2016 19:41
|
|
|
Plorkyeran posted:MVC was originally developed in the 70s yeah but for GUIs. I think it was a while before people thought of it for web pages.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2016 19:42
|
|
|
nosql was invented by lotus notes in the 80s
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2016 19:44
|
|
|
Clockwerk posted:lol at Jekyll, why would someone think that a good idea jekyll is very bad but static site generators aren't as a whole i like pelican because it was really simple to install & i don't need to touch ruby or node
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2016 19:45
|
|
|
Shaggar posted:nosql was invented by lotus notes in the 80s Try multivalue databases (PICK) in the 60s
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2016 20:02
|
|
|
hitler was invented in the 1890s and not with MUMPS as you thought
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2016 20:07
|
|
|
Plorkyeran posted:MVC was originally developed in the 70s Cool, then this whole thing was just ill-conceived at that time too. Well, at least we get to throw it away and start over
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2016 20:11
|
|
|
JawnV6 posted:claiming everything interesting happened in the 70's is a lot like gauss making GBS threads all over any younger mathematician "oh i came up with that when I was 15 and it was a dead end" like gently caress you gauss, non-euclidean geometry is a hundred years behind where it could've been yeah but gauss is also one of the few people to have a whole wikipedia page just to list all the things named after him and also to index the other lists of things named after him like if anyone gets to be full of himself about math it's gauss
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2016 20:17
|
|
|
Parallel Paraplegic posted:yeah but gauss is also one of the few people to have a whole wikipedia page just to list all the things named after him and also to index the other lists of things named after him i gauss you have a point
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2016 20:25
|
|
|
Parallel Paraplegic posted:yeah but gauss is also one of the few people to have a whole wikipedia page just to list all the things named after him and also to index the other lists of things named after him
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2016 20:45
|
|
|
Still working through an asp.net mvc tutorial and it just created a working crud-page for a dumb database i made in like 3 clicks.  It's like im living in the future here.Cant wait until i can add javascript to it and start hating it all again.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2016 21:21
|
|
|
entity framework is terrible no argument there, it's like nosql in that it seems to have been thought up by people that decided that stores procs were too hard for some reason but that putting business logic into something else e.g. scalar functions was somehow a good idea on mvc though, i have now gone through the stages of grief specifically: elation at replacing a legacy process with something that works 20x faster, rage at how it doesn't then work because the msdn blog examples i followed were all the opposite of good practice, grief because i needed to recode the whole view model and now acceptance that i should dehumanize and face to binding. except i can't work out how to make arbitrary view properties bind back to my model
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2016 21:29
|
|
|
Plorkyeran posted:MVC was originally developed in the 70s that's why one of the main criticisms of LMO's employer is that they're exceptionally backwards when it comes to technology; in the late 1990s they still didn't even consider applying well-understood design patterns from the 1970s one of the reasons people who have worked there for a while tend to be pretty good is that anyone who can succeed in that mess using only stone knives and bearskins will be just fine with access to modern platforms and tools they're like the opposite of the "node.js is close to the metal" people
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2016 21:53
|
|
|
Zaxxon posted:yeah but for GUIs. I think it was a while before people thought of it for web pages. not really, the web was only around a couple years before NeXT invented the MVC web application with WebObjects (announced early 1994)
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2016 21:55
|
|
|
Shaggar posted:nosql was invented by lotus notes in the 80s and Lotus Notes itself wasn't even invented in the 80s it was just a PC clone of Notes on the Plato system, which Ray Ozzie used and I think worked on, but didn't actually create so I never got why either he or Anders Hjelsberg got any credit as an "inventor," they just took stuff others did on other platforms and packaged it for PC clones running DOS/Windows
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2016 21:59
|
|
|
Charlie Mopps posted:Still working through an asp.net mvc tutorial and it just created a working crud-page for a dumb database i made in like 3 clicks. so basically what DirectToWeb in WebObjects did in the late 1990s D2W did rule-based generation of a UI from templates and a data model, where you could create rules for specific types and actions to customize the application in virtually every way, and you could also completely customize the templates too so if you wanted to use a custom template for a specific entity's List page, you could just add a rule like code:and it would automatically use your custom ButtList template, which could just override a few things from the basic List template and still get all of the rule-driven behavior it was p sweet, I was aghast when I saw people gushing over rails and how awesome its idea of "scaffolding" was
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2016 22:09
|
|
|
eschaton posted:that's why one of the main criticisms of LMO's employer is that they're exceptionally backwards when it comes to technology; in the late 1990s they still didn't even consider applying well-understood design patterns from the 1970s Yeah, a shocking number of devs I know who left here are googlers and MS folks now. This "manager" thing is breaking me. I'm kinda at the point where I think I'll go job shopping once I get outside the window where I have to pay back the tuition for my CS classes. The only thing is, I really don't want to leave Madison for familial and personal reasons. I wonder how hard it is to get a remote-only job.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2016 22:11
|
|
|
eschaton posted:and Lotus Notes itself wasn't even invented in the 80s so basically they were stebe
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2016 22:11
|
|
|
Charlie Mopps posted:Still working through an asp.net mvc tutorial and it just created a working crud-page for a dumb database i made in like 3 clicks. my indie game generator site was like a hundred lines of ASP 4 webforms and a Markov class I grabbed off github ASP.net 5 is magic though and the documentation is nonexistent atm
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2016 22:20
|
|
|
Charlie Mopps posted:Still working through an asp.net mvc tutorial and it just created a working crud-page for a dumb database i made in like 3 clicks. are you using mvc 4/5 or 6? 6 is asp.net 5 and way different. asp.net 5 just went RC and the RTM is due out later this quarter so if you're serious about switching over to the best web frameworks, starting w/ asp.net 5 is probably better than going w/ mvc4/5 (though they are perfectly usable)
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2016 22:27
|
|
|
Luigi Thirty posted:ASP.net 5 is magic though and the documentation is nonexistent atm
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2016 22:27
|
|
|
Shaggar posted:are you using mvc 4/5 or 6? 6 is asp.net 5 and way different. asp.net 5 just went RC and the RTM is due out later this quarter so if you're serious about switching over to the best web frameworks, starting w/ asp.net 5 is probably better than going w/ mvc4/5 (though they are perfectly usable) with asp 5 / mvc 6 and the "nameof" function from the latest c#/vb versions, are we finally rid of magic strings forever or is there still need for t4mvc?
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2016 22:55
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 15:48 |
|
|
Shaggar posted:are you using mvc 4/5 or 6? 6 is asp.net 5 and way different. asp.net 5 just went RC and the RTM is due out later this quarter so if you're serious about switching over to the best web frameworks, starting w/ asp.net 5 is probably better than going w/ mvc4/5 (though they are perfectly usable) aspnet5 is good but the documentation is not really all there yet and it breaks a lot so the tutorials you find from needful doers won't work so get comfy with poking around finding methods and figuring poo poo out also the Mac/Linux versions suck bad and will for quite some time imo. your best bet until they make it not suck is to compile on Windows then put it in a container so you can run it on a decent server that isn't Windows
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2016 23:00
|
|
