|
cross compiling sucks aggg
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 16:59
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 14:56 |
|
|
lol i dont understand the c build ecosystem on linux at all
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 17:11
|
|
|
Finster Dexter posted:Razor is really good unless you're doing js single-page apps. I'm glad it's so hard to do, business people want them made, and everyone sucks at it. if you have a tolerance to npm you're like guaranteed a job right now
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 17:22
|
|
|
Bloody posted:lol i dont understand the c build ecosystem on linux at all i have a page explaining the 13 different make assignment operators open p. much all the time
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 17:27
|
|
|
wide stance posted:I doubt most, if any, .NET web shops use Razor anymore, in favor of Angular or React. You need javascript to do things on the front-end, a lot more than people think, so you might as well put your views there and actually have it mesh with that logic. No one wants to use a website that reloads the page just to show something different on said page or refresh the data. haha the job i just left uses Razor views, and JUST started vetting KendoUI + jQuery for frontend stuff edit*- apparently angular and react weren't supported well enough and didn't seem fit for production use... their words, not mine Count Thrashula fucked around with this message at 17:31 on Apr 4, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 17:28
|
|
|
Finster Dexter posted:Razor is really good unless you're doing js single-page apps. yeah basically
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 17:30
|
|
|
Flat Daddy posted:I'm glad it's so hard to do, business people want them made, and everyone sucks at it. if you have a tolerance to npm you're like guaranteed a job right now I don't think any business people are caring about web frameworks. and if they do they don't know what they're talking about
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 17:31
|
|
|
JawnV6 posted:i have a page explaining the 13 different make assignment operators open p. much all the time i seem to have graduated from make problems to stdlib problems (im cross compiling so they might actually be real bugs) it kinda seems like this math.h is broken
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 17:32
|
|
|
Shaggar posted:I don't think any business people are caring about web frameworks. and if they do they don't know what they're talking about
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 17:43
|
|
|
tef posted:i hate computers
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 17:45
|
|
|
darthbob88 posted:No, they just know that SPAs are fashionable, so whatever new thing they make has to be an SPA, never mind the use cases or whether an SPA is even the right choice. I would tell them its an SPA and then write it in razor.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 17:51
|
|
|
in the last step of my build its just including some random rear end system header file instead of the cross-compiler's version of the system header file and it breaks everything and i have no idea why its getting included its literally specifying the wrong path in the command to the gcc its like hell gently caress it -I/usr/include and just stomping over the rest of the config lmao why
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 17:51
|
|
|
Shaggar posted:if you are using javascript at all for anything other than like form validation or maybe injecting new content from a razor partial, you are doing things wrong. grabbing a chunk of html called a "razor partial" and shoving it into the page with jquery is much worse than react dynamic UIs with razor are at best on par with typescript/react-based stuff. razor has terrible error reporting-- definitely admire that "do nothing" webscale approach to error handling-- and the way templates are managed is really bad compared to react components, but typescript without bundling has the risk that maybe you forgot a dependent script tag in a page while developing
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 18:04
|
|
|
razor gives you super detailed errors about what went wrong I don't think you know what razor is. also razor templates are so much better than the poo poo awful way react does things with the mixed code and markup. that's some asp forms poo poo
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 18:08
|
|
|
ah good i just made a backup of the /usr/include directory and symlinked the cross-compiler's version over it and now it works more
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 18:30
|
|
|
Shaggar posted:razor gives you super detailed errors about what went wrong I don't think you know what razor is. also razor templates are so much better than the poo poo awful way react does things with the mixed code and markup. that's some asp forms poo poo no it's not. you've never used react
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 18:32
|
|
|
Bloody posted:ah good i just made a backup of the /usr/include directory and symlinked the cross-compiler's version over it and now it works more I'm the "more"
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 18:34
|
|
|
if u wanna give a somewhat factual criticism just say functional programming is math major wankery or something. but in reality fp rules for making UIs
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 18:35
|
|
|
esp when you have TS and can get wanky with the types, too
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 18:36
|
|
|
leper khan posted:I'm the "more" it builds successfully but when i deploy it on the target platform it claims to be missing _ctypes which is a problem
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 18:39
|
|
|
Flat Daddy posted:no it's not. you've never used react I'm going by the examples they use on their site. are you using some 3rd party templating system for it that removes the markup from the javascript?
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 18:49
|
|
|
and razor puts not-really-c# in your markup. i don't think this is a compelling argument you're making here shaggar
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 18:57
|
|
|
we got a react + redux + material ui app up and my least favorite part is material ui by a long shot yes, what i'm really looking for in my styling framework is for it to be extremely opinionated and inflexible, thank you google, you do know best after all
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 19:08
|
|
|
HoboMan posted:we got a react + redux + material ui app up and my least favorite part is material ui by a long shot open always wins
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 19:11
|
|
|
it's far far better to put a markup language into a programming language (jsx) than a programming language into a markup language (razor). my experience with razor error handling is making a typo or renaming a string name of a template or what have you, getting a white page instead of a prominent error when I render that page, and finding an unobtrusive green squiggly when I come upon the view that has a problem. react components are actually symbols in the program, and they're checked well for consistent usage by typescript. they're more usable and maintainable than razor templates.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 19:14
|
|
|
I enjoy Slack's absolute failure to implement infinite upward scrolling.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 19:16
|
|
|
fleshweasel posted:it's far far better to put a markup language into a programming language (jsx) than a programming language into a markup language (razor). you must have it setup wrong cause razor errors will give you big errors w/ stack traces telling you what went wrong. having to dig through your javascript to figure out where you put markup that you want to change sounds horrible. Shaggar fucked around with this message at 19:45 on Apr 4, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 19:21
|
|
|
Doom Mathematic posted:I enjoy Slack's absolute failure to implement infinite upward scrolling. also any mechanism for managed invite portals beyond "there's this undocumented admin api, guess we'll never get rid of it!"
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 19:43
|
|
|
jsx and react components are both really good and not at all the same as 90s-style php/html/js/sql soup. you're still separating concerns, just by component instead of by language. and honestly if you're doing anything that isn't totally trivial your logic and markup generally wind up separate anyway (container components, redux, whatever). the surrounding frontend ecosystem is annoying to deal with but react is cool.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 19:44
|
|
|
I got a volunteer to slap an SPA on my side project's API and he insisted on using Angular instead of React  I mean I don't have to deal with the JS side of things but it still makes me sad nonetheless Seems to work decently though, so I can't complain.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 20:01
|
|
|
HoboMan posted:we got a react + redux + material ui app up and my least favorite part is material ui by a long shot holy poo poo material ui is literally incompatible with css styling!!!
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 20:37
|
|
|
HoboMan posted:holy poo poo material ui is literally incompatible with css styling!!! it's horrible. i inherited a project a while back that was using some react material library and you could only choose from the themes it provided, there was no place to override anything unless you wanted to go nuclear and use !important everywhere.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 22:03
|
|
|
i don't know what i'd do instead of my white collar office computer touching job
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 22:13
|
|
|
i've never heard of material react is very good though.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 22:59
|
|
|
hackbunny posted:a little. never tunnel adapters though oh noooo today is tomorrow and I got drunk with coworkers instead and the effortpost will have to wait 😱
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 23:14
|
|
|
getting drunk is always an acceptable excuse to delay things as far as i'm concerned
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 23:32
|
|
|
fleshweasel posted:it's far far better to put a markup language into a programming language (jsx) than a programming language into a markup language (razor). it is annoying that if you call a template that doesnt exist or if you capitalise the model declaration it will just give a white screen or a bullshit 'breakpoint could not ve inserted' type error but otheriwse you'll get a stack dump on page compile i really really like being able to call methods from the app code to get data into razor views for poo poo that it doesnt make sense to include in the model or being able to just hit getters on the model to return raw data on load direct into on page functions if required instead of having a billion controller routes each performing a bespoke function or a massively bloated nodel class edit: to be fair i haven't looked at react at all beyond being flippant about it Powerful Two-Hander fucked around with this message at 23:53 on Apr 4, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 23:50
|
|
|
react is cool but redux is the truly good poo poo. I could swap out react for something else and not really care cuz the react layer is kept as dumb as possible (no state and very little usage of component lifecycle, mostly pure functions) redux is event sourcing on the front end. with redux I can have error reports that have the entire history for a users browsing session, and all I had to do was write or add in a small middleware. I can load their history, play their actions in my environment, then go back in time and inspect component state at various points etc. with redux dev tools I pretty much instantly see where I hosed up, whether my action has the wrong data, or state isn't being updated by a reducer correctly also redux-saga is great. my entire app can be synchronous, no callbacks or promises anywhere. except for the sagas where I shove all that async poo poo, and can write them imperative style with generators, kind of like how in Haskell you'd rather write io in do notation and quarantine it into one place
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2017 00:19
|
|
|
yeah redux is amazing
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2017 01:39
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 14:56 |
|
|
this is the first time I've ever heard of Razor, it is something that an intern at Microsoft built and they promptly dumped after a year like Google Web Toolkit
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2017 01:46
|
|
