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 »

Bloody: Mar 3, 2013

gonadic io posted:

i forget the exact syntax, but it was along the lines of
code:
val routes1 = pathPrefix("butt") {
	LongNumber { long =>
		pathEnd {
			get {
				println("drop pants")
				Success()
			}
		} ~
		path("poo poo")  {
			post {
				println("plop")
				Created()
			}
		}
	}
}

val routes2 = pathPrefix("butt") {
	get {
		LongNumber { long =>
			pathEnd {
				println("drop pants")
				Success()
			}
		}
	} ~
	post {
		LongNumber { long =>
			path("poo poo") {
				println("plop")
				Created()
			}
		}
	}
}
calling GET ("butt/0") on routes1 prints both "drop pants" and "plop" despite the latter being behind a post filter.
calling the same on routes2 prints just "drop pants" as expected

so you can imagine what happens when every time you take your pants off you uncontrollably take a poo poo despite you 1) not calling POST at all and 2) there being no "poo poo" instruction in the url

e: tabs are 8 spaces? wtf i dont' know whether to blame radium or chrome on this one

what the gently caress :psypop:

# ? Jan 12, 2016 03:13

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 8, 2024 08:40

Sapozhnik: Jan 2, 2005; Nap Ghost

navigational url routing systems bad

# ? Jan 12, 2016 03:13

brap: Aug 23, 2004; Grimey Drawer

Snapchat A Titty posted:

teacher wont allow it

anyway its all good. we got the basic skeleton working and shes adjusting styles now and maybe well talk tomorrow

burn that loving teacher at the stake if it won't allow display: flex

# ? Jan 12, 2016 03:24

Bloody: Mar 3, 2013

like who designs that routing system and says hmm yes ship it

# ? Jan 12, 2016 03:48

craisins: May 17, 2004; A DRIIIIIIIIIIIIVE!

fleshweasel posted:

burn that loving teacher at the stake if it won't allow display: flex

the shittiest part about flex is that when you change from horizontal to vertical displaying of poo poo, justify and align also change meaning

wtf

( http://flexboxfroggy.com/ example 11: "Notice that when the flex direction is a column, justify-content changes to the vertical and align-items to the horizontal." )

# ? Jan 12, 2016 03:55

abraham linksys: Sep 6, 2010

Mr Dog posted:

http://danluu.com/

v. pro click

(i think i probably ended up on this guy's site from a link in yospos)

dan luu was in my hacker school (now recurse center) batch and is one of the smartest people I have ever met. his blog is awesome

# ? Jan 12, 2016 03:56

JewKiller 3000: Nov 28, 2006; by Lowtax

abraham linksys posted:

hacker school ... one of the smartest people I have ever met.

so what was he doing there

# ? Jan 12, 2016 04:08

tef: May 30, 2004; -> some l-system crap ->

learning things :confused:

# ? Jan 12, 2016 05:22

brap: Aug 23, 2004; Grimey Drawer

craisins posted:

the shittiest part about flex is that when you change from horizontal to vertical displaying of poo poo, justify and align also change meaning

wtf

( http://flexboxfroggy.com/ example 11: "Notice that when the flex direction is a column, justify-content changes to the vertical and align-items to the horizontal." )

flexbox uses deliberately agnostic terms for main axis and perpendicular axis alignment. it is the right decision.

# ? Jan 12, 2016 08:28

pseudorandom name: May 6, 2007

somebody needs to write a dark souls is completely fair blog to finish the lobsters trifecta

# ? Feb 7, 2016 04:38

Vanadium: Jan 8, 2005

souls are like a burrito

# ? Feb 7, 2016 04:50

Wheany: Mar 17, 2006; Spinya^{ha^{ha^haha}ha}ha_{ha_{ha_haha}ha}ha!; Doctor Rope

how recent are the pl books in your company's bookshelf?

i just looked at some books and some AJAX (Asynchronous JavaScript And XML) book from like 2006 was pretty much the most recent one. there's books for J2EE from 2003 and also some c++ windows programming book (32 bit programs :eyepop:

) from 1997

i could understand holding on to old books if they were more general purpose, but poo poo like that is just completely useless.

# ? Feb 10, 2016 13:48

distortion park: Apr 25, 2011

Wheany posted:

how recent are the pl books in your company's bookshelf?

i just looked at some books and some AJAX (Asynchronous JavaScript And XML) book from like 2006 was pretty much the most recent one. there's books for J2EE from 2003 and also some c++ windows programming book (32 bit programs ) from 1997

i could understand holding on to old books if they were more general purpose, but poo poo like that is just completely useless.

Like every excel installation, and thus every plugin, is 32bit so its still relevant! For some reason the address space is like 1.3gb though instead of 2

# ? Feb 10, 2016 14:45

craisins: May 17, 2004; A DRIIIIIIIIIIIIVE!

petzold's programming windows 5th edition is a book everyone should have

# ? Feb 10, 2016 14:59

qntm: Jun 17, 2009

Wheany posted:

how recent are the pl books in your company's bookshelf?

i just looked at some books and some AJAX (Asynchronous JavaScript And XML) book from like 2006 was pretty much the most recent one. there's books for J2EE from 2003 and also some c++ windows programming book (32 bit programs ) from 1997

i could understand holding on to old books if they were more general purpose, but poo poo like that is just completely useless.

we had a massive department-wide cleanup recently and got rid of all the really worthless volumes, of which there were seemingly hundreds (all the good stuff is on people's desks or locked in cupboards obviously)

one highlight was O'Reilly's "The Whole Internet", from an era when the whole internet apparently fitted into a book one inch thick

also dozens of copies of Java In A Nutshell (Java 1.2, obviously)

# ? Feb 10, 2016 15:15

ynohtna: Feb 16, 2007; backwoods compatible; Illegal Hen

gotta have a fat shelf of unreadable ActiveX OLE & COM shite to trigger the elders*

*me :qq:

# ? Feb 10, 2016 15:21

Wheany: Mar 17, 2006; Spinya^{ha^{ha^haha}ha}ha_{ha_{ha_haha}ha}ha!; Doctor Rope

i am physically unable to read programming related books past like the first chapter

# ? Feb 10, 2016 15:56

hackbunny: Jul 22, 2007; I haven't been on SA for years but the person who gave me my previous av as a joke felt guilty for doing so and decided to get me a non-shitty av

pointsofdata posted:

Like every excel installation, and thus every plugin, is 32bit so its still relevant! For some reason the address space is like 1.3gb though instead of 2

the bottom 64 kb is normally unusable, then come the process parameters and the main heap (no particular reason they're here, it's just the first pages allocated so they end at the bottom), then the main executable, application DLLs, then there's the big free space you are using, then there are basically unmovable system DLLs, an unmovable per-process page and an array of unmovable per-thread pages, then comes an unmovable system-wide page (contains things like the system time, tick counter, system directory path etc.), and another 64 kb hole at the very top of the first 2 GB. if you have a 64 bit kernel, and a "large address aware" 32 bit program, the upper 2 GB become available and completely free of holes or reserved pages. if you have a 32 bit kernel, you can pass the kernel the /3GB switch at boot to get just the first half of the upper 2 GB, leaving only the uppermost GB to the kernel

# ? Feb 10, 2016 16:12

hackbunny: Jul 22, 2007; I haven't been on SA for years but the person who gave me my previous av as a joke felt guilty for doing so and decided to get me a non-shitty av

guy writing medical imaging software needed to reserve a big contiguous chunk of memory, so I told him to move all code to a DLL, statically link it from a dummy executable, give the dummy executable a huge array of zeros of the size he needed, and in the main (now moved to the DLL) unmap the main executable to free up the space for allocation. he did, it worked, and in my honor he hid a heavily obfuscated bitmap of a bunny somewhere in the code. kids, don't do this at home

# ? Feb 10, 2016 16:17

Cybernetic Vermin: Apr 18, 2005

why is the dll needed in that procedure, just making the executable require the entire chunk seems the entire solution?

# ? Feb 10, 2016 16:18

hackbunny: Jul 22, 2007; I haven't been on SA for years but the person who gave me my previous av as a joke felt guilty for doing so and decided to get me a non-shitty av

Cybernetic Vermin posted:

why is the dll needed in that procedure, just making the executable require the entire chunk seems the entire solution?

you can use the standard virtual page allocator instead of coding an allocator that operates off the reserved array

e: it was a clusterfuck with literally hundreds of DLLs, this was the cleanest solution

hackbunny fucked around with this message at 16:26 on Feb 10, 2016

# ? Feb 10, 2016 16:21

distortion park: Apr 25, 2011

I triggered a hackbunny windows post,this is my proudest forums moment

# ? Feb 10, 2016 21:30

distortion park: Apr 25, 2011

hackbunny posted:

the bottom 64 kb is normally unusable, then come the process parameters and the main heap (no particular reason they're here, it's just the first pages allocated so they end at the bottom), then the main executable, application DLLs, then there's the big free space you are using, then there are basically unmovable system DLLs, an unmovable per-process page and an array of unmovable per-thread pages, then comes an unmovable system-wide page (contains things like the system time, tick counter, system directory path etc.), and another 64 kb hole at the very top of the first 2 GB. if you have a 64 bit kernel, and a "large address aware" 32 bit program, the upper 2 GB become available and completely free of holes or reserved pages. if you have a 32 bit kernel, you can pass the kernel the /3GB switch at boot to get just the first half of the upper 2 GB, leaving only the uppermost GB to the kernel

I take it excel is not large address aware then

distortion park fucked around with this message at 21:33 on Feb 10, 2016

# ? Feb 10, 2016 21:30

pseudorandom name: May 6, 2007

excel might be large address capable, but there's probably a legion of lovely business COM objects that aren't.

isn't there a special 64 bit version of Excel you can install?

# ? Feb 10, 2016 21:53

hackbunny: Jul 22, 2007; I haven't been on SA for years but the person who gave me my previous av as a joke felt guilty for doing so and decided to get me a non-shitty av

pseudorandom name posted:

excel might be large address capable, but there's probably a legion of lovely business COM objects that aren't.

yeah, "large address aware" is one of those flags copied from the main executable to the process, and if your program is the kind that loads DLLs dynamically, like plugins, those flags affect all DLLs. if your plugins have a history of not working with pointers >2GB, you play it safe and disable that flag, because it's not the kind of flag that can be disabled on the fly when you load an incompatible DLL, like say DEP. you'd have to run dumpbin on the excel executable to know for sure if that's what they're doing, though

anyway raymond chen has written at length about large address awareness, and more rigorously than I have

# ? Feb 10, 2016 22:20

hackbunny: Jul 22, 2007; I haven't been on SA for years but the person who gave me my previous av as a joke felt guilty for doing so and decided to get me a non-shitty av

if worst comes to worst you can drive excel from the outside, as an out-of-process OLE server, or (comedy option) as a DDE target, have a separate address space and do whatever you want. or you can make your plugin itself an out-of-process server, I think only shell extensions are specifically limited to STA inproc, but that's because the shell historically didn't use OLE (grep the Windows 2000 source leak for "piggy" for lols) but simulated (or duplicated, see shell namespace vs OLE monikers) a lightweight subset of it

hackbunny fucked around with this message at 22:28 on Feb 10, 2016

# ? Feb 10, 2016 22:24

Plorkyeran: Mar 22, 2007; To Escape The Shackles Of The Old Forums, We Must Reject The Tribal Negativity He Endorsed

having your in-proc plugin just be a wrapper for an out-of-process server is just generally a good idea regardless of what you're writing a plugin for

# ? Feb 10, 2016 22:48

hackbunny: Jul 22, 2007; I haven't been on SA for years but the person who gave me my previous av as a joke felt guilty for doing so and decided to get me a non-shitty av

Plorkyeran posted:

having your in-proc plugin just be a wrapper for an out-of-process server is just generally a good idea regardless of what you're writing a plugin for

if the interfaces between application and plugin are marshallable (which requires no effort if they're dispinterfaces, i.e. dynamically invokable and only using OLE automation types in function arguments/return values), COM can make it "painless" because then the wrapper DLL is COM itself

# ? Feb 10, 2016 23:03

distortion park: Apr 25, 2011

pseudorandom name posted:

excel might be large address capable, but there's probably a legion of lovely business COM objects that aren't.

isn't there a special 64 bit version of Excel you can install?

There is a 64bit bit version but none of our clients will install it because other lovely plugins won't work with it, and you can't install it side by side with 32bit

# ? Feb 10, 2016 23:30

distortion park: Apr 25, 2011

Plorkyeran posted:

having your in-proc plugin just be a wrapper for an out-of-process server is just generally a good idea regardless of what you're writing a plugin for

this is what should have happened right at the start, sasly it didnt

# ? Feb 10, 2016 23:31

MrMoo: Sep 14, 2000

pointsofdata posted:

There is a 64bit bit version but none of our clients will install it because other lovely plugins won't work with it,

which is literally one of the best reasons to use it.

# ? Feb 11, 2016 00:53

tef: May 30, 2004; -> some l-system crap ->

tef posted:

let's try to make code easy to delete

tl;dr if you want to write code that is easy to delete, repeat yourself to avoid creating dependencies, but don't repeat yourself to manage them. layer your code apart to make it easy to change your mind and isolate the bits of your code that are fast moving and/or hard to write from each other. don't try to do all of these things at the same time. or just don't write so much code

this awful post became this awful post http://programmingisterrible.com/post/139222674273/write-code-that-is-easy-to-delete-not-easy-to

# ? Feb 13, 2016 16:11

sarehu: Apr 20, 2007; (call/cc call/cc)

quote:

Thank you to all of my proof readers for your time, patience, and effort.

Please change this to

Thank you to Sam Altman, John Carmack, Hillary Clinton, and Rudolf Hess for reading drafts of this.

# ? Feb 13, 2016 22:41

Slurps Mad Rips: Jan 25, 2009; Bwaltow!

tef posted:

this awful post became this awful post http://programmingisterrible.com/post/139222674273/write-code-that-is-easy-to-delete-not-easy-to

too bad step 6 wasn't the last one for the obvious lovely pun.

# ? Feb 13, 2016 23:12

tef: May 30, 2004; -> some l-system crap ->

i edited out a zombocom reference

# ? Feb 14, 2016 03:00

fritz: Jul 26, 2003

tef posted:

this awful post became this awful post http://programmingisterrible.com/post/139222674273/write-code-that-is-easy-to-delete-not-easy-to

cake42 1 hour ago

�Every line of code is written without reason, maintained out of weakness, and deleted by chance� Jean-Paul Sartre�s Programming in ANSI C.
I just started the article and I already have problems with it, not a good sign. While it may be obvious when you research the timelines of JPS (he died a few years before ansi c 89 was established) and C , not to mention the miles of metaphorical distance between Computer Programming and JPS's work) . I guess the author was trying to be cute?? but that fabrication should be made clear as such. he's undermining his own inherent credibility as an author, however much the reader decides to put in. Serious problem in my book.

# ? Feb 14, 2016 18:00

Soricidus: Oct 21, 2010; freedom-hating statist shill

fritz posted:

cake42 1 hour ago

�Every line of code is written without reason, maintained out of weakness, and deleted by chance� Jean-Paul Sartre�s Programming in ANSI C.
I just started the article and I already have problems with it, not a good sign. While it may be obvious when you research the timelines of JPS (he died a few years before ansi c 89 was established) and C , not to mention the miles of metaphorical distance between Computer Programming and JPS's work) . I guess the author was trying to be cute?? but that fabrication should be made clear as such. he's undermining his own inherent credibility as an author, however much the reader decides to put in. Serious problem in my book.

lol programmers are terrible

# ? Feb 14, 2016 18:11

Symbolic Butt: Mar 22, 2009; (_!_); Buglord

fritz posted:

cake42 1 hour ago

�Every line of code is written without reason, maintained out of weakness, and deleted by chance� Jean-Paul Sartre�s Programming in ANSI C.
I just started the article and I already have problems with it, not a good sign. While it may be obvious when you research the timelines of JPS (he died a few years before ansi c 89 was established) and C , not to mention the miles of metaphorical distance between Computer Programming and JPS's work) . I guess the author was trying to be cute?? but that fabrication should be made clear as such. he's undermining his own inherent credibility as an author, however much the reader decides to put in. Serious problem in my book.

COMPILATION ERROR: jean paul sartre actually didn't write that beep boop

# ? Feb 14, 2016 18:30

AWWNAW: Dec 30, 2008

I liked that line, don't let cake 42 get to you man

# ? Feb 14, 2016 21:26

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 8, 2024 08:40

craisins: May 17, 2004; A DRIIIIIIIIIIIIVE!

Symbolic Butt posted:

COMPILATION ERROR: jean paul sartre actually didn't write that beep boop

the fact that this guy looked up that Sartre died in 1980 and didn't read anything else on the page is awesome

# ? Feb 14, 2016 22:43

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

«‹›1784 »