|
What a poo poo show. Revert the database to no posts
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2017 22:00
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 12, 2024 01:45 |
|
|
posting on a page that doesn't exist thanks lowtax
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2017 22:02
|
|
|
so, what, every thread there's a spooky X-post-long hole after every 25 posts, for different values of X in each thread? how the gently caress does this even happen 
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2017 22:03
|
|
|
Sapozhnik posted:so, what, every thread there's a spooky X-post-long hole after every 25 posts, for different values of X in each thread? nah looks like its spooky X-post hole after every 40-X posts
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2017 22:10
|
|
|
Sapozhnik posted:so, what, every thread there's a spooky X-post-long hole after every 25 posts, for different values of X in each thread? A bunch of missing posts that no longer count towards posts per page but still count towards the number of pages a thread thinks it has.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2017 22:18
|
|
|
radiuuuuuuuuuum
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2017 22:19
|
|
|
Lowtax be like:SQL code:HoboMan fucked around with this message at 22:48 on Oct 6, 2017 |
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2017 22:27
|
|
|
quiggy posted:i have a suite of classes that encapsulate three primitive types and one stl type: bool, double, int, and std::string. i had to create a Type enum with values BOOL, DOUBLE, INT, and STRING to do some of what i want not sure I understand (is it like a struct or like a union?), but I can probably help if you could explain in more depth
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2017 22:41
|
|
|
HoboMan posted:i want a real qa team so bad as long as I work in this field, I will never go without full time QA people again, if I can do anything about it
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2017 22:43
|
|
|
HoboMan posted:Lowtax be like: yeah it was definitely something like this. i don't buy that zdr did it because zdr has consistently not hosed things up the whole time he's been adminning.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2017 22:45
|
|
|
What's worse? Javascript or PHP?
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2017 22:49
|
|
|
php without a shade of doubt
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2017 22:50
|
|
|
HoboMan posted:Lowtax be like: but in the dbo.Thrad table there's a poastCount int (it used to be a tinyint which was why there was the old limit) that radium put in and everything uses for post count (because it's super fast!) and Lowtax forgot to update it
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2017 22:50
|
|
|
ratbert90 posted:What's worse? PHP, because there are actual good alternatives, but there's no replacement for Javascript.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2017 22:53
|
|
|
ratbert90 posted:What's worse? both are equally terrible because they encourage people who have no right to be doing anything with a computer to "program"
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2017 22:53
|
|
|
Two entire forums (admittedly a lot of overlap) of people who do this poo poo for a living and we're still in this situation.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2017 22:53
|
|
|
gonadic io posted:Two entire forums (admittedly a lot of overlap) of people who do this poo poo for a living and we're still in this situation. its not like theres a huge concilium of 6-fig webdev/dba goons trying to crack this problem, no one just gives a poo poo a shitposts away
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2017 22:55
|
|
|
gonadic io posted:Two entire forums (admittedly a lot of overlap) of people who do this poo poo for a living and we're still in this situation.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2017 23:08
|
|
|
gonadic io posted:Two entire forums (admittedly a lot of overlap) of people who do this poo poo for a living and we're still in this situation. because lowtax wants people to do this stuff for free or cheap and is actively hostile towards anybody who tells him anything he doesn't want to hear. who would want that job?
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2017 23:10
|
|
|
give all of yospos full R/W access to everything on SA, tia
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2017 23:29
|
|
|
Elysiume posted:give all of yospos full R/W access to everything on SA, tia id wipe yor poasts
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2017 23:32
|
|
|
cinci zoo sniper posted:id wipe yor poasts
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2017 23:33
|
|
|
Elysiume posted:the modern era's burning of the library of alexandria code:
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2017 23:50
|
|
|
starting to think that the guy who was rewriting the forums in elixir may have been on to something
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2017 23:59
|
|
|
has anyone seen some missing posts?
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2017 00:41
|
|
|
its like the ultimate hellban
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2017 00:50
|
|
|
e/n incoming  how do i get better at greenfield development? i think i'm pretty good at working with existing stuff and i haven't had much trouble walking into some pretty gnarly projects and getting a handle on things, but whenever i get asked to build something from scratch i panic and deliver (imo) pretty bad work. it's real demoralizing because i don't want to do bad work, and it makes what should be a good opportunity (no more legacy code!) into a huge source of stress.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2017 00:59
|
|
|
jony neuemonic posted:e/n incoming Can you give an example of why you think your work is bad and in what areas you feel those projects were lacking?
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2017 01:09
|
|
|
Free the goastpost
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2017 01:12
|
|
|
jony neuemonic posted:e/n incoming The trick is to make one quick and gnarly version, then take a second wind, and perform magic on the "existing solution" as you normally would.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2017 01:13
|
|
|
Prototype to do all the loving up early then rewrite
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2017 01:14
|
|
|
"plan to throw one away" etc etc yeah i agree it kind of sucks cause you get so excited not to deal with legacy garbage and then you're staring at public static void main and go completely blank trying to anticipate every single architectural decision up front
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2017 01:15
|
|
|
making sure you have good requirements is probably everything
DONT THREAD ON ME fucked around with this message at 01:19 on Oct 7, 2017 |
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2017 01:15
|
|
|
hackbunny posted:not sure I understand (is it like a struct or like a union?), but I can probably help if you could explain in more depth alright gonna effortpost about this, keep in mind i live in a c++03 hellworld that also has weird coding requirements like no templates (or i'd do it that way) so i have a pure virtual class called Action. an Action is essentially a string/value pair, so it has two fields, std::string key and some value of some type called param. this is for a pretty basic library so i don't need to worry about what the key actually is, that's for the code that uses an Action to worry about. there are four types of Actions i care about : BoolAction, DoubleAction, IntAction, and StringAction. each one derives from Action, and carries with it a few functions it's required to implement, most notably getRawParam(), which returns a const void* to the param field. it also supplies a getType() function, which returns a value from an ActionType enum that has values BOOL, DOUBLE, INT, and STRING, and a function called getPair(), which returns a std::pair that wraps the ActionType and const void* together. each one also by contract has a getParam() function that returns a value of its type, although because no templates these cannot inherit from a base getParam() there's also a setRawParam function that accepts const void* pointers, casts them to the proper type, and stores them in param, and an ActionFactory that does most of the heavy lifting when creating actions: feed it a type, a key, and a const void* and it'll give you an Action of the correct type. ActionFactory also has a clone method that lets you copy Actions more easily; all Actions have their copy constructors and assignment operators hidden to force you to use clone instead. this is an extremely core piece of a major rewrite of our largest software package, so it needs to be as fast as possible. if it weren't for that i'd rely in large part on dynamic_casting Action pointers to learn their types, but that's too slow so i have the ActionType system set up instead. it's really the lack of templates that's killing me, or i'd just make an Action<T> class that has a getParam() that returns a const T&. or if c++ had literally any element of reflection i wouldn't have to do stupid bullshit like switch statements on getType() to cast properly. basically c++03 without templates is a hellworld of pain
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2017 01:20
|
|
|
Reduce your scope for the first version, don't try to think ahead too hard about features you might need to add later. Just get something simple that works solidly, even if it's not very efficient or idiomatic. You're going to do many re-writes. It's a fact of development, don't let it bum you out. At some point it switches over from greenfield to maintenance / extension. Incremental development is the key thing to keep in mind. It's really hard to build a functional complex system from scratch, nearly all complex systems evolved from working simple ones.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2017 01:20
|
|
|
ErIog posted:Can you give an example of why you think your work is bad and in what areas you feel those projects were lacking? it's possible that i'm just being too picky, but it never feels like i hit a spot where things are robust. it's always just good enough to work but that's it. to be fair to myself, the last couple of times i've been asked to build something new it's been using things i have no experience with but i dunno, i should be able to read the docs and not gently caress it up too badly. carry on then posted:"plan to throw one away" etc etc this is a huge part of it. all i can see is the end result they want, but never the steps i need to get there.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2017 01:23
|
|
|
MALE SHOEGAZE posted:it probably really depends on what you're doing but making sure you have good requirements is probably everything That's the fallacy of waterfall, you should assume requirements are going to be varied and undefined until significantly later. Choose technologies you understand and concentrate getting something working but also flexible for new demands. Ideally you should be able to regularly replace components with better(tm) versions as required. To avoid is locking into particular technologies and architecture which could break the entire project or significantly hamper growth: i.e. snowflake technologies.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2017 01:24
|
|
|
"my workplace bans the language facilities that make it easy to do X; why does this language make it so hard to do X?"
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2017 01:24
|
|
|
Jabor posted:"my workplace bans the language facilities that make it easy to do X; why does this language make it so hard to do X?" tbf templates in c++ are an awful hacky thing that are held together with twine and glue, so i get why my boss doesn't like them. just saying in most other languages there's more ways to skin a cat
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2017 01:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 12, 2024 01:45 |
|
|
jony neuemonic posted:e/n incoming i get this - especially if you're in a larger company where a lot of the work is extension and addition. some tips * think backwards. who's the customer of this? what do they actually want? Once you have an idea of what they want, you can start figuring out how to get them it * Come up with the set of constraints you're working under. Try and really pick the constraints that have to absolutely be fulfilled * Talk to your coworkers about your idea. Rubber ducking helps but getting a fresh pair of brain hemispheres helps more * Be conservative. Assume that your group is going to have to own this, and that every new concept you bring in is yet more cognitive load. The clearest example of this is bringing in a new language that nothing else uses or knows. * Write out a design. Take notes, do some prototyping, come up with your data model and interactions. Write up a design doc that hits these 1. What is this all for? Often times you know how exactly what you mean when you say "Frothing Bit Reaper" but unsuprisingly a lot of your peers won't. Explaining what this is and why we're doing this is important for context 2. Remember those constraints from that other bullet? Add these in too. Without those, someone reading your doc will think you're making the wrong decision because they lack the context of the constraints you're operating under. 3. Go into medium-level detail. Be specific enough that you could hand the doc off to someone else to code it up, but general enough that you haven't literally done all the work It turns out that "measure twice, cut once" is very applicable to software development, and having a document on hand that explains the what, why, and how of the project is really helpful for the actual implementation of said project
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2017 01:27
|
|