|
no because elm explicitly avoids monadic frp
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2016 19:51
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 14:45 |
|
|
a snake fried while eating its own tail with nothing on the side
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2016 19:59
|
|
|
why i've sold monorepos to odgenville and north haverbrook and golly did it put them on the map!
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2016 20:08
|
|
|
monorepos: let's face it you're writing a web app or some poo poo, just mash it in together, it makes deployment a piece of piss multiple repos: this is good when you need to deploy components separately. at a previous co: we had 9+ repos and deploys for the front end app, and the mapping servers it went through a gearman server, which is for background jobs, and we used it for low latency. it did not work most deploys touched every shared codebase (except the mapping bit) and as a result, many commits and merges had to be synchronized before deploys it was also easy to get to a position where a deployment would not work if someone had merged something bad thing is, if we'd used a monorepo, it would have been easier to scale out. because of the nature of the work, it would be easier to put a web front end, and mapping backend on a single server, maybe with a shared cache between them and stick it into autoscaling groups. scaling would be pretty easy and staging setups too. it's not that monorepos are good or bad it is just that release management gets painful the more repositories you have 
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2016 20:13
|
|
|
also lol git submodules did you just tell me to go gently caress myself
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2016 20:14
|
|
|
fart simpson posted:if you mean why does anyone care about it & use it though, then it;'s because functional programming is really food and functional reactive programming is a really nice way to do ui stuff, and elm exists in a niche where it gets you most of the good parts of something like haskell + an frp library without 95% of the complexity overhead oh, ok so... it's a functional language you create uis in that transpiles to html/js/css?
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2016 20:22
|
|
|
Tankakern posted:oh, ok yah, specifically a pure functional reactive programming language. frp has first class support and is built into the language itself rather than being a library
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2016 20:24
|
|
|
Has anybody made a Nightmare on Elm Street joke yet?
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2016 21:10
|
|
|
As a Millennial I posted:in my experience you gotta load the PDBs from that very build. idk why. is it non-deterministic or something?? .net framework builds are deliberately nondeterministic yeah (it adds a timestamp) .net core is changing this
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2016 21:16
|
|
|
Tankakern posted:oh, ok I can't wait til some rear end in a top hat makes some dumb loving thing that transpiles into elm
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2016 23:02
|
|
|
FamDav posted:facebook never used p4, they switched from svn to hg. google was using p4 well into ridiculously scaled terrority and now run their own perforce-like. amazon switched from perforce to (for a very short period of time) svn to git. microsoft stores their code on bill gates old laptop or something. versionsets are so, so awful when you have to upgrade shared libs though when i was there our product had like a dozen different interdependent versionsets and it was a real bad time when we needed to pass changes through or upgrade stuff especially when different things had mutually incompatible dependencies - ugh
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2016 23:07
|
|
|
craisins posted:I can't wait til some rear end in a top hat makes some dumb loving thing that transpiles into elm gotta have some way to get typeclasses in
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2016 23:18
|
|
|
TwoDice posted:versionsets are so, so awful when you have to upgrade shared libs though not sure what you mean by interdependent version sets but yeah when you get hit by version set hell it can be really frustrating  . the builders tool team is working on dependency management and vendoring this year to get away from Live (more or less the mono repo equivalent of version sets).
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2016 23:31
|
|
|
craisins posted:I can't wait til some rear end in a top hat makes some dumb loving thing that transpiles into elm js to elm transpiler! all we need is a "hip" name for it
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2016 23:34
|
|
|
HappyHippo posted:js to elm transpiler! all we need is a "hip" name for it dutch coffee disease
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2016 23:36
|
|
|
Asymmetrikon posted:gotta have some way to get typeclasses in ask me about inheriting a F# project where someone tried to turn F# into Haskell jk don't
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2016 23:39
|
|
|
what does f# do that they wanted it to?
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2016 23:45
|
|
|
AWWNAW posted:ask me about inheriting a F# project where someone tried to turn F# into Haskell I need to see that code. I once tried to see if I could code a Monad typeclass in Visual Basic.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2016 23:50
|
|
|
why would you try to turn f# into haskell instead of just using haskell
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2016 23:52
|
|
|
Asymmetrikon posted:why would you try to turn f# into haskell instead of just using haskell maybe it needed to interop with some c# app/lib?
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2016 23:54
|
|
|
CPColin posted:Has anybody made a Nightmare on Elm Street joke yet? This is the first time I've heard it, and it's good
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2016 23:59
|
|
|
Arcsech posted:maybe it needed to interop with some c# app/lib? yeah, probably i can't blame them too hard, whenever i do haskell now i define the "|>" and ">>" operators to get nice piping
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2016 00:00
|
|
|
FamDav posted:not sure what you mean by interdependent version sets but yeah when you get hit by version set hell it can be really frustrating idk what it's like now but we had like subsystemA imports live subsystemB imports live subsystemC imports subsystemA and subsystemB so it could use them etc so if you wanted to use a new thing in live in C you had to pull it through A/B first also there were multiple levels of this, not just one
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2016 00:06
|
|
|
why would you try to turn f# into haskell when f# is already a better haskell than haskell
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2016 00:11
|
|
|
clearly they don't know what makes a good haskell, or they would've just shot straight for the top and gone with idris
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2016 00:13
|
|
|
Asymmetrikon posted:clearly they don't know what makes a good haskell, or they would've just shot straight for the top and gone with idris needs a web framework called loofa TwoDice posted:idk what it's like now but we had like dang that's really sad and I reflexively dry gagged thinking about maintaining it. maybe there were reasons for it but that's a serious misuse of the concept.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2016 00:19
|
|
|
there's more than a few "notable figures" in the F# community that like to huff their own farts and try to port various Haskell packages to F#, throw them on NuGet and abandon them. the only one I've seen done well is the Parsec port
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2016 00:21
|
|
|
i don't know poo poo about the ocaml community but willing to bet there aren't a bunch of pretentious dickwads trying to ape haskell there?
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2016 00:40
|
|
|
only OCaml i know is Coq, and it seemed fine, but I guess that's probably not representative of the whole
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2016 00:43
|
|
|
i would just like to say that "jenkins" and "transpile" are p good terms ive never used jenkins but the name sounds like a cross between a butler and a crusty old maintenance guy who deals with all the gross stuff transpile makes me think of the other day when i went through 3 boxes of junk at home and rearranged them into 5 differently-sorted boxes of junk 
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2016 00:55
|
|
|
FamDav posted:do you have any idea why bazel has been getting a lot of talk over buck when buck is literally a reimplementation of blaze? or is it just because its recently released. we use buck to build our android stuff and it feels slow as balls
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2016 01:05
|
|
|
i have not been impressed with what little i've seen of bazel everything just seems half-assed compared to maven
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2016 01:10
|
|
|
FamDav posted:needs a web framework called loofa yeah we were all pretty new to the infrastructure and noone near us said NO STOP DONT when we set it up
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2016 01:39
|
|
|
AWWNAW posted:i don't know poo poo about the ocaml community but willing to bet there aren't a bunch of pretentious dickwads trying to ape haskell there? no that's literally the best thing about the ocaml community, they managed to avoid that somehow they're like "yes, we could rework the entire standard library to be in monadic style. no, we didn't do that, because it sucks"
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2016 01:40
|
|
|
when I was fresh out of school at a startup I had to set up our repos. i had no idea what I was doing, so it was a single git repo with a bunch of zip files containing the linux kernel source and other open source projects and patches and poo poo and a bunch of bash scripts to extract, configure, compile, then zip the result back up and commit it. it was really bad
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2016 02:30
|
|
|
Jabor posted:A monorepo makes some degree of sense in any environment where you control all the code, depending on how much code-reuse and integration you have between projects. listen to this man monorepos can be cool and good, but it's not gonna work for you, the schlub in the corner with open source tooling and like five total infrastructure developers
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2016 02:32
|
|
|
abraham linksys posted:not really sure how this would help with my complaint it sounds like the actual problem is that you have hilariously unnatural junctions between projects defying conway's law yields unhappy results 100% of the time the actual fix isn't a mono-repo, it's a mono-lith. consolidate your poo poo, because your "services" are too tightly coupled to actually serve anyone
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2016 02:34
|
|
|
tef posted:let's face it you're writing a web app or some poo poo, just mash it in together, it makes deployment a piece of piss the reason that monorepos are such a great model for a webapp is the conways law bit. organizationally, everyone who works on the webapp is likely to occasionally touch all parts of the webapp. extracting pieces into "microservices" is likely to introduce totally unwanted overhead, simply because the provider of the service and the consumer of the service are in the same group and there's no defined interface
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2016 02:39
|
|
|
you can have separate repos for libraries that are used internally by the webapps for things like security but yeah webapps should be single repos.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2016 02:43
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 14:45 |
|
|
JewKiller 3000 posted:no that's literally the best thing about the ocaml community, they managed to avoid that somehow monadic style sucks, or the ocaml standard library sucks? (i am aware that the answer is "both", god drat that is a bad stdlib.)
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2016 02:59
|
|