|
(did-you-start? 'programming (with 'lisp))
|
# ? Jan 29, 2019 10:41 |
|
|
# ? May 17, 2024 02:31 |
|
LOOK I AM A TURTLE posted:(did-you-start? 'programming (with 'lisp)) (did-startp you programming (lambda (event) (usesp event lisp)))
|
# ? Jan 29, 2019 10:58 |
|
redleader posted:Would you be able to expand on the caveats and issues with Elm? Most users seem to tend towards the fanboy end of the spectrum, so I haven't seen much discussion of its limitations etc. This is probably the wrong thread, it is not a coding horror at all, but : it feels like a toy. A very pretty toy that works really well and makes me feel like a Real Functional Programmer with my immutable data structures and curried-everything and lack of side effects, fighting the holy war against imperative code. It’s very carefully designed, language is small and pretty simple and well thought through. It works _great_ for simple things, the compiler is fantastic for debugging (even if the passive-aggressive error messages get a bit much after a while), generally stuff Just Works if it compiles and runtime errors are extremely rare. I liked using it most of the time but I’ll probably never write another Elm app again. Some people love it and I totally understand why. But just a few things off the top of my head (sorry for the brain dump):
mod saas posted:Did you start (programming [with lisp])? Was very late (and I was very tired [And I kept making edits to the post {and adding them in brackets (and my thought process kinda leaked through)}]). Reading it back, and indeed it does look like lisp gibberish RobertKerans fucked around with this message at 13:34 on Jan 29, 2019 |
# ? Jan 29, 2019 12:03 |
|
RobertKerans posted:Was very late (and I was very tired [And I kept making edits to the post {and adding them in brackets (and my thought process kinda leaked through)}]). Reading it back, and indeed it does look like lisp gibberish Please don't steal my posting gimmick
|
# ? Jan 29, 2019 12:42 |
|
Thanks for the detailed write up! Good stuff.
|
# ? Jan 29, 2019 23:27 |
|
It sounds like at least a few of the Elm issues would be resolved if web assembly takes off and you can bypass Javascript. Is that a fair assessment?
|
# ? Jan 30, 2019 01:00 |
|
double post
ultrafilter fucked around with this message at 01:03 on Jan 30, 2019 |
# ? Jan 30, 2019 01:00 |
|
ultrafilter posted:It sounds like at least a few of the Elm issues would be resolved if web assembly takes off and you can bypass Javascript. Is that a fair assessment? I can see how having webassembly as a compilation target would help elm, but I don't don't see how it would address any issues in that list. Speaking of the list, I liked it, too. I'm surprised that ffi seemed so insurmountable; it was my understanding that you can write modules with synchronous javascript interop, just that you couldn't publish them (although looking into it now I see someone wrote a package manager to get around that). No one can reasonably disagree that the language is being developed with the brakes firmly applied, and I'd expect there to be things falling by the wayside as a result.
|
# ? Jan 30, 2019 05:41 |
|
Soricidus posted:(did-startp you programming (lambda (event) (usesp event lisp))) love first my was FORTH
|
# ? Jan 30, 2019 09:42 |
code:
|
|
# ? Jan 30, 2019 10:23 |
|
Doc Hawkins posted:I can see how having webassembly as a compilation target would help elm, but I don't don't see how it would address any issues in that list. Yeah, the FFI thing you can get around, but then you're going off-piste and the risk of things not working when the runtime/packages/etc are updated or modified starts to rise; we tried to do it for a few minor things, but dropped it and wen't back to the boilerplate as it wan't really worth the hassle. webassembly...meh, it would probably help Elm overall, but yeah, I would expect it to mean nothing with regards to actually programming in Elm. If it did switch to that as a compilation target, I don't see how anything else would change.
|
# ? Jan 30, 2019 16:05 |
|
Pull Request day!code:
|
# ? Jan 31, 2019 10:08 |
|
RobertKerans posted:but then you're going off-piste I resolve to start using this phrase.
|
# ? Feb 1, 2019 07:32 |
I found a database table at works that has not one but three composite indices that all order by primary key first.
|
|
# ? Feb 1, 2019 14:27 |
|
I found these very incorrect iOS pixel to point and point to pixel conversions on GitHub written in Obj-Ccode:
|
# ? Feb 1, 2019 17:37 |
|
Noticed this in another department's form for submitting an RSVP to an event:HTML code:
|
# ? Feb 7, 2019 22:52 |
|
CPColin posted:Noticed this in another department's form for submitting an RSVP to an event: I recently found something like this on a server, thankfully they had also misconfigured the mailserver so nothing had ever actually sent, I love it when one fuckup fixes another fuckup - like the time I found some code that was incidentally secure because the input cleansing code was so loving backwards that even valid values weren't getting through, never mind someone doing some SQL injection or something.
|
# ? Feb 8, 2019 01:24 |
|
CPColin posted:Noticed this in another department's form for submitting an RSVP to an event: Given how thoroughly dead semantic HTML is on the front-end, you're lucky it's not <div class="hidden checked form button" data-name="_cc[]" data-value="foo@example.com"></div>
|
# ? Feb 8, 2019 01:39 |
|
cynic posted:I recently found something like this on a server, thankfully they had also misconfigured the mailserver so nothing had ever actually sent, I love it when one fuckup fixes another fuckup - like the time I found some code that was incidentally secure because the input cleansing code was so loving backwards that even valid values weren't getting through, never mind someone doing some SQL injection or something. For a simple website I maintain I use a tiny little CMS called CouchCMS. It's free to use and the nicest thing for me was that it makes it incredibly easy to migrate static html/css pages into the CMS WYSIWYG editor. Anyway, you can build extremely simple web forms through it, that do nothing but some basic validation, send the form contents to a pre-configured e-mail address, and show the user a success or error message you can define. When I built one of those a couple years ago I wanted a script to do a bit of processing on the form input, add the processed result into a hidden form field, and send that along in the e-mail. Yes, I am aware that anyone who knows of the dev console can change that processing logic but this wasn't anything sensitive so whatever. Anyway, I tried using the CMS's hidden input field (which seems to correspond to the html input type=hidden) and it didn't work. Turns out this hidden field is used by the CMS purely to send immutable data. It will send whatever you preconfigured in there. CouchCMS Support confirmed that my approach of using a regular input field for my processing output and making it hidden with css was the way to go.
|
# ? Feb 8, 2019 07:49 |
|
Carbon dioxide posted:For a simple website I maintain I use a tiny little CMS called CouchCMS. It's free to use and the nicest thing for me was that it makes it incredibly easy to migrate static html/css pages into the CMS WYSIWYG editor.
|
# ? Feb 8, 2019 23:30 |
|
A while back, but yeah, this. Chris Allen is also very responsive and offers educational discounts and stuff.
|
# ? Feb 9, 2019 19:25 |
|
He's also a huge piece of poo poo and a major bully within the community, up to and including screwing his co-author out of any money for the book, but... I'm glad you had good experiences, I guess? The book is good, though, I'd just suggest finding a way to obtain it that doesn't give him money.
|
# ? Feb 9, 2019 19:55 |
|
Sinestro posted:He's also a huge piece of poo poo and a major bully within the community, up to and including screwing his co-author out of any money for the book, but... I'm glad you had good experiences, I guess? The book is good, though, I'd just suggest finding a way to obtain it that doesn't give him money. I haven't heard anything about this; do you have a link?
|
# ? Feb 10, 2019 07:48 |
|
E: Totally wrong thread ....
|
# ? Feb 10, 2019 21:50 |
|
I think this is the result of some underlying coding horror. Let me know if there's a more appropriate thread for it: https://twitter.com/LouiseMCMLXXV/status/1094608284772958214
|
# ? Feb 10, 2019 23:17 |
|
nvm
|
# ? Feb 11, 2019 00:26 |
|
Absurd Alhazred posted:I think this is the result of some underlying coding horror. Let me know if there's a more appropriate thread for it: That is an extremely common error. Jan 1 1970 is the staring point of unix epoch time, so a variety of errors that miscalculate time for whatever reason end up with this date, which is zero. Unix time is measured in milliseconds since that date, and is the underlying system for most timekeeping. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unix_time
|
# ? Feb 11, 2019 06:04 |
|
Taffer posted:That is an extremely common error. Jan 1 1970 is the staring point of unix epoch time, so a variety of errors that miscalculate time for whatever reason end up with this date, which is zero. Unix time is measured in milliseconds since that date, and is the underlying system for most timekeeping. Yeah, quite a few people in the responses pointed that out. Kind of silly to write up a situation where an error results in "please come back at 0".
|
# ? Feb 11, 2019 14:48 |
|
My bet is a null pointer exception somewhere.JavaScript code:
xtal fucked around with this message at 16:09 on Feb 11, 2019 |
# ? Feb 11, 2019 15:37 |
|
Absurd Alhazred posted:Yeah, quite a few people in the responses pointed that out. Kind of silly to write up a situation where an error results in "please come back at 0". Not really, that's what I would expect of something with no error handling.
|
# ? Feb 11, 2019 15:40 |
|
Over here it shows up as Dec 31 1969
|
# ? Feb 12, 2019 05:41 |
|
Speaking of dates, while not a coding horror, we frequently implement a CMS that runs with MS SQL Server as the back end. While going through testing, the customer apparently went hardcore, checking to see what the oldest date that could be entered into date fields was. Then they demanded the system design document be updated to reflect that the oldest date that could be entered was 1/1/1753. You know, because their workers are going to be trying to search for child support or medicaid applications turned in before we even became a country.
|
# ? Feb 13, 2019 01:10 |
|
code:
|
# ? Feb 14, 2019 23:37 |
|
|
# ? Feb 15, 2019 16:13 |
|
At least they are trying, right? That's all any of us can do.
|
# ? Feb 15, 2019 19:32 |
|
It's so safe!
|
# ? Feb 15, 2019 20:00 |
|
Che Delilas posted:It's so safe! I mean... the outer try was there because the lock could throw.
|
# ? Feb 15, 2019 21:59 |
|
poemdexter posted:At least they are trying, right? That's all any of us can do. If at first you don't succeed, nest another try clause.
|
# ? Feb 15, 2019 22:09 |
|
Exceptions were a mistake.
|
# ? Feb 15, 2019 22:20 |
|
|
# ? May 17, 2024 02:31 |
|
Ola posted:If at first you don't succeed, nest another try clause. code:
Scaramouche fucked around with this message at 00:28 on Feb 16, 2019 |
# ? Feb 15, 2019 22:27 |