terrible programmers: my god, it's full of chars

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Serious Hardware/Software Crap > YOSPOS > terrible programmers: my god, it's full of chars

«‹›1446 »

Fuck them: Jan 21, 2011; and their bullshit

Shaggar posted:

stay away from asp forms poo poo. use MVC and the templates that come w/ it. or write your own templates or get templates from somewhere else. someones probably already written a library to add razor helpers for generating jquery datatables.

altho if you really want to you could do just html/js and then use webapi to deliver the data into a datatable. but now u have html sitting somewhere, unattended and untemplated.

As much as I'd love to do it this way it would be me spearheading it all. ~The only other dev~ just poops out a standalone little forms page and throws it up on iis when he feels like it and has done so for ten years. My chernobyl meltdown earlier was largely how lovely forms turned out to be.

At my actually managed prior job with multiple devs we would just json data into a datatable where we'd define the rows in markup and use ko to help combine everything in a way that honestly worked pretty loving nice. The markup was so clean that it was honestly a breeze and is probably why I wanted to break poo poo trying to do this grid view bullshit. |

code:

 <table class="data-grid" id="NotesIndexTable-@ViewData("UniqueID")">
                <thead>
                    <tr>
                        <th>&nbsp;</th>
                        <th>PIN</th>
                        <th> Date</th>
                        <th>Notes</th>
                        <th> Report Date</th>
                        <th>Subject</th>
                    </tr>
                </thead>
                <tbody data-bind="foreach: viewnotes">
                    <tr data-bind="click: $root.getCaseNote">
                        <td style="width: 40px;">*</td>
                        <td data-bind="text: PIN" style="width: 100px;"></td>
                        <td data-bind="text: Date" style="width: 100px; white-space: nowrap"></td>
                        @* //<td data-bind="text: Contact"></td>*@
                        @*<td data-bind="text: Author"></td>*@
                        <td data-bind="text: Notes"></td>
                        <td data-bind="text: Date" style="width: 120px; white-space: nowrap"></td>
                        <td data-bind="text: Subject" style="width: 200px;"></td>
                    </tr>
                </tbody>
            </table>

Is this not the way you'd advise doing it? Worked for me and was pretty drat clean. List of viewnotes and of each viewnotes I'd bind an element to a column.

# ? Jul 29, 2014 15:22

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? Jun 7, 2024 03:19

Careful Drums: Oct 30, 2007; by FactsAreUseless

Shaggar posted:

stay away from asp forms poo poo. use MVC and the templates that come w/ it. or write your own templates or get templates from somewhere else. someones probably already written a library to add razor helpers for generating jquery datatables.

altho if you really want to you could do just html/js and then use webapi to deliver the data into a datatable. but now u have html sitting somewhere, unattended and untemplated.

I was thinking about making a toy pizza ordering/order management app using just web api and angular. Is angular still overkill or would knockout be enough?

# ? Jul 29, 2014 15:30

FamDav: Mar 29, 2008

Malcolm XML posted:

wow its like if u buy into the mvvm pattern wpf is great!!!!

mods rename to mvvm wpf tia

# ? Jul 29, 2014 15:33

Squinty Applebottom: Jan 1, 2013

Careful Drums posted:

I was thinking about making a toy pizza ordering/order management app using just web api and angular. Is angular still overkill or would knockout be enough?

all javascript libraries past underscore + jQuery is overkill

# ? Jul 29, 2014 15:37

Shaggar: Apr 26, 2006

Careful Drums posted:

I was thinking about making a toy pizza ordering/order management app using just web api and angular. Is angular still overkill or would knockout be enough?

angular is always overkill unless you are applying for a job that uses angular (rip 2 u). even knockout probably isn't necessary depending on what u r doing

# ? Jul 29, 2014 15:53

Careful Drums: Oct 30, 2007; by FactsAreUseless

but what if i want the back end to literally send nothing but json.

like, you go to one page and the back end says "here have a html page with a <script> to (insert library here) and and empty body, go"

then do everything else with ajax calls so the back end would only dump data and never worry about rendering a view.

that sounds like a thing that angular/ember are built for (based on watching a few pluralsight vids)

# ? Jul 29, 2014 15:56

Careful Drums: Oct 30, 2007; by FactsAreUseless

that seems good because if the back end only returns json instead of rendered html then suddenly oh snap i have a back end so i can bang out a new mobile-first site, apps, even support your stupid winrt thing.

# ? Jul 29, 2014 15:57

Workaday Wizard: Oct 23, 2009; by Pragmatica

i surf with js off :tubular:

# ? Jul 29, 2014 15:58

kitten emergency: Jan 13, 2008; get meow this wack-ass crystal prison

Careful Drums posted:

that seems good because if the back end only returns json instead of rendered html then suddenly oh snap i have a back end so i can bang out a new mobile-first site, apps, even support your stupid winrt thing.

it is good and you shouldn't listen to shaggar about anything

# ? Jul 29, 2014 15:59

Shaggar: Apr 26, 2006

there shouldn't be a difference between your mobile and non-mobile site. you should use media queries to properly size the page and add/remove content. those people call it "responsive design" which is a terrible term for it but that's what they use. your javascript should be absolutely minimal and only used to do things like update page content on user action.

it should not ever build the page layout.

using knockout to data-bind json data to an existing table? ok.
using javascript to build the table with content from json? no. bad. don't do this.

if you have content that's not shown in certain contexts, then hide it w/ css. don't delete and create it with javascript!

building an MVC app that delivers fully rendered html for browsers and that also has a webapi controller to deliver the same content via REST for non-browsers is very easy to do and very maintainable. it ends up creating a far superior experience for your browser users.

slowkit and failfox will struggle against any javascript you send them, so you want to minimize it as much as possible.

# ? Jul 29, 2014 16:06

Shaggar: Apr 26, 2006

uncurable mlady posted:

it is good and you shouldn't listen to shaggar about anything

this guy makes bad websites that everyone hates

# ? Jul 29, 2014 16:06

Careful Drums: Oct 30, 2007; by FactsAreUseless

i duno he's been dropping some good .net knowlege itt

# ? Jul 29, 2014 16:09

Bloody: Mar 3, 2013

Careful Drums posted:

but what if i want the back end to literally send nothing but json.

like, you go to one page and the back end says "here have a html page with a <script> to (insert library here) and and empty body, go"

then do everything else with ajax calls so the back end would only dump data and never worry about rendering a view.

that sounds like a thing that angular/ember are built for (based on watching a few pluralsight vids)

this actually sounds reasonable, gives u good separation of concerns between your nodejs server and your javascript webpage

# ? Jul 29, 2014 16:10

Shaggar: Apr 26, 2006

I wrote a thing that uses json to fill page content because I had the requirement of not using an app server and it works but it makes me cringe w/ all the content pop-in

# ? Jul 29, 2014 16:10

Careful Drums: Oct 30, 2007; by FactsAreUseless

Shaggar posted:

there shouldn't be a difference between your mobile and non-mobile site. you should use media queries to properly size the page and add/remove content. those people call it "responsive design" which is a terrible term for it but that's what they use. your javascript should be absolutely minimal and only used to do things like update page content on user action.

it should not ever build the page layout.

using knockout to data-bind json data to an existing table? ok.
using javascript to build the table with content from json? no. bad. don't do this.

if you have content that's not shown in certain contexts, then hide it w/ css. don't delete and create it with javascript!

building an MVC app that delivers fully rendered html for browsers and that also has a webapi controller to deliver the same content via REST for non-browsers is very easy to do and very maintainable. it ends up creating a far superior experience for your browser users.

slowkit and failfox will struggle against any javascript you send them, so you want to minimize it as much as possible.

yeah that's a good point. heavy js sites means a lot of browsers are going to suck royal dick at rendering it.

and that's also a good point that if controllers are thin (as i've been told that they should be) then hacking a webapi on top of normal ActionResult controllers would be easy-as-gently caress.

okay thanks shaggar i will do it that way

# ? Jul 29, 2014 16:13

Careful Drums: Oct 30, 2007; by FactsAreUseless

Bloody posted:

this actually sounds reasonable, gives u good separation of concerns between your nodejs server and your javascript webpage

gently caress nodejs i'm talking asp.net mvc/webapi

# ? Jul 29, 2014 16:14

Careful Drums: Oct 30, 2007; by FactsAreUseless

Shaggar posted:

I wrote a thing that uses json to fill page content because I had the requirement of not using an app server and it works but it makes me cringe w/ all the content pop-in

yeah i've had to do this before with nothing but jquery and i thought 'hey i think this is a problem that ember/backbone/angular is for' and it works nice but all that javascript is kind of a kludge and i did my best to separate but well this is the terrible programmer thread

e: the jquery would do an ajax then render some html based on that ajax AND show/hide stuff by assigning css properties. is is p bad

# ? Jul 29, 2014 16:15

kitten emergency: Jan 13, 2008; get meow this wack-ass crystal prison

Bloody posted:

this actually sounds reasonable, gives u good separation of concerns between your nodejs server and your javascript webpage

this guy knows whats up

# ? Jul 29, 2014 16:16

kitten emergency: Jan 13, 2008; get meow this wack-ass crystal prison

Shaggar posted:

this guy makes bad websites that everyone hates

i make websites that don't require license fees to host

# ? Jul 29, 2014 16:16

Shaggar: Apr 26, 2006

Careful Drums posted:

yeah that's a good point. heavy js sites means a lot of browsers are going to suck royal dick at rendering it.

and that's also a good point that if controllers are thin (as i've been told that they should be) then hacking a webapi on top of normal ActionResult controllers would be easy-as-gently caress.

okay thanks shaggar i will do it that way

right. you're db layer is where all the magic happens anyway so in your MVC controller you're getting a model from the db and passing it off to a view. in the webapi controller you're grabbing that very same model and just throwing it back out as is for the mediaformatter to convert.

that way all your maintenance in the server app is in the db layer or the views in mvc. you only touch the controllers when you're adding new functionality.

# ? Jul 29, 2014 16:19

Shaggar: Apr 26, 2006

Careful Drums posted:

yeah i've had to do this before with nothing but jquery and i thought 'hey i think this is a problem that ember/backbone/angular is for' and it works nice but all that javascript is kind of a kludge and i did my best to separate but well this is the terrible programmer thread

e: the jquery would do an ajax then render some html based on that ajax AND show/hide stuff by assigning css properties. is is p bad

knockout does the same thing as ember/backbone/angular with 100000x less complexity. theres no scenario where angular is a thing you should be using. it just doesn't exist.

uncurable mlady posted:

i make websites that don't require license fees to host

even if you're doing just rest you're gonna be using webapi so you're paying for a license. if you aren't using webapi and you're doing rest then lol. enjoy impossible to maintain garbage p-langing on top of your impossible to maintain garbage javascript

# ? Jul 29, 2014 16:24

Nomnom Cookie: Aug 30, 2009

except that jax-rs is a thing and free

# ? Jul 29, 2014 17:16

Shaggar: Apr 26, 2006

jax-rs is ok and better than p-langing but the asp.net stuff is just better. webapi and mvc are so good and easy 2 use.

# ? Jul 29, 2014 17:59

Careful Drums: Oct 30, 2007; by FactsAreUseless

http://thecodist.com/article/i_39_m_sick_of_gof_design_patterns

quote:

Given that languages today are often functional or hybrid types, the GOF patterns may be entirely irrelevant for many people. Today having a broader knowledge of how to use these types of languages and being willing to learn how to use them effectively is way more useful than remembering a static set of anything. Programming these days is constantly changing, and anything written twenty years ago may be partially or even completely pointless today.

So stop asking if people can name a design pattern. Everyone replies "Singleton" anyway!

this guy is dumb right? :ohdear:

design patterns are very good things

# ? Jul 29, 2014 19:10

Shaggar: Apr 26, 2006

patterns are useful as shorthand for common techniques, but that's it. i wouldn't ask someone to "write a singleton" as an interview question, but I might ask them when its appropriate to use a singleton.

# ? Jul 29, 2014 19:16

more like dICK: Feb 15, 2010; This is inevitable.

Terrible programmer status: Wow JMX. Wow, automatically exposing Spring beans as mbeans. Wow wow wow :vince:

# ? Jul 29, 2014 19:37

Shaggar: Apr 26, 2006

jmx is cool

# ? Jul 29, 2014 19:52

more like dICK: Feb 15, 2010; This is inevitable.

Today JMX taught me that embedded Jetty + a small Spring MVC app loads ~5500 classes :eng101:

# ? Jul 29, 2014 20:05

Nomnom Cookie: Aug 30, 2009

the only bad thing about jmx is its so old it uses rmi

# ? Jul 29, 2014 21:42

Fuck them: Jan 21, 2011; and their bullshit

I got to go back to my desktop app today. Then I was done making minor changes.

Now I'm back to web.

I suggested a little MVC and the sr dev looked interested. He said we had time to spare to try it. :unsmith:

# ? Jul 29, 2014 21:45

BONGHITZ: Jan 1, 1970

if only i could do things without having to learn how to do those things, that would be really nice

# ? Jul 29, 2014 21:51

Notorious b.s.d.: Jan 25, 2003; by Reene

Kevin Mitnick P.E. posted:

the only bad thing about jmx is its so old it uses rmi

jolokia exposes jmx over http

this especially makes it easy to use jmx data in p-langs

# ? Jul 29, 2014 21:55

compuserved: Mar 20, 2006; Nap Ghost

i'm a terrible programmer in need of wrist rest, ergonomic mousepad, and/or ergonomic keyboard recommendations. i've been doing a lot more coding lately and i'm starting to feel some pain. please help me yospos

# ? Jul 29, 2014 22:01

compuserved: Mar 20, 2006; Nap Ghost

compuserved posted:

i've been doing a lot more coding lately and i'm starting to feel some pain.

welcome to yospos!

# ? Jul 29, 2014 22:01

Bloody: Mar 3, 2013

compuserved posted:

i'm a terrible programmer in need of wrist rest, ergonomic mousepad, and/or ergonomic keyboard recommendations. i've been doing a lot more coding lately and i'm starting to feel some pain. please help me yospos

we have a thread for this

# ? Jul 29, 2014 22:46