Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
Lumpy
Apr 26, 2002

La! La! La! Laaaa!



College Slice

camoseven posted:

Kind of getting off topic but the ads for the flip phones are even more confusing than the phones themselves. I don't want a phone that folds and won't fit in my pocket, that sounds super dumb. But the ads don't tell me why I would want one, they just say "well obviously you want one, just go get one!". I don't understand!!!

:capitalism:

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Lumpy
Apr 26, 2002

La! La! La! Laaaa!



College Slice

prom candy posted:

Money can buy many peanuts carrots.

Explain how!

Lumpy
Apr 26, 2002

La! La! La! Laaaa!



College Slice

America Inc. posted:

I was gonna ask, has anyone here tried functional programming with Clojure or Elm, or even Ramda? It's my understanding that functional programming used to be more popular in Web circles.

In regards to wasm, the company I used to be at has been trying to compile their C++ backend into wasm for ages for the web app. It hasn't worked out so far.

E: I actually see a parallel between modern C++ (and Rust) and the emergence of frameworks like Svelte and Next. With both there is a focus on moving the responsibility for performance off the developer onto the language or framework itself, and a focus on doing more stuff at compile time and not run time.

I have written a few small apps in Elm, and it's an amazing language. The downside for me was interactivity (CSS stuff basically) and fetching JSON with APIs. Note that my experience was years ago, so things might have changed. It was nothing I couldn't have worked around / with, but "I could do this much, much faster in React" was a strong pull. That said, even if you don't wind up using Elm a lot, I would highly recommend building something in it because the architecture and way you have to code taught me many a good lesson.

Lumpy
Apr 26, 2002

La! La! La! Laaaa!



College Slice

death cob for cutie posted:

Context: I teach/write curriculum for a web development bootcamp that teaches three languages/stacks/frameworks/whatever: Python with Flask, JS with Node/Express/React and Java using Spring. All I really personally do is Python programming; I'm a "web developer" in that I only gently caress up writing basic JS like, half the time. Students get the Python course first and it's really intended primarily to get them used to the basics of webdev (what is a "server", what does a database do, what does it mean to receive requests and return responses, etc.) while also accepting the fact that most of the students will have been writing any kind of code for about like, four weeks total. A key part of this is that the Python section in particular is not explicitly a "hey this is Real-World" experience, but it's really to make sure they get their footing as newbie programmers before we start throwing more at them.

Towards the end of their Flask section we teach them how to write some AJAX to make API calls to the server and then puke data out into the browser. A lot of instructors are pushing to just staple React on top of things; a lot of other instructors have a concern that React may be too complicated for students who still fumble getting their Flask server up and running sometimes. (I cannot emphasize enough that these are students who, before starting this course, did no kind of computer-touching)

What're my options in the world of JavaScript frameworks that are, first and foremost, easy to get going? They don't have to be particularly popular, they don't need to have widespread industry use - they just need to be well-documented and in-use somewhere.

Honestly, while create-react-app is not suited for a new PRODUCTION web app any more, it is as easy as you can get to get going.

Lumpy
Apr 26, 2002

La! La! La! Laaaa!



College Slice
Because I'm lazy and didn't read the documentation, does tRPC require your front and back end be in he same repo?

Lumpy
Apr 26, 2002

La! La! La! Laaaa!



College Slice

America Inc. posted:

I'm pushing to add Storybook to an open source project I work on, but I'm getting some pushback because the lead maintainer says they "tried to use it before and decided not to". I interviewed with a startup the other week and they said something similar.

From my perspective, Storybook is nothing but gain because you can develop UI components by themselves. You don't have to load up the whole app to develop, and it encourages developers to make reusable components. You can make prototypes and have UX review them before they go into the app. Right now people are spinning up the whole app for development and hot reloading takes a non-trivial amount of time.

What are the pain points or things that really suck about Storybook?

The downsides of Storybook are having to mock things you might not need to mock for tests; but in the new version you can use your storybook components as the `render` for many testing libraries / frameworks. If you host it for non-devs, you have to spin that up and so on (as mentioned above) and as also stated, if people are looking for a design source of truth, it may muddy the water a bit, as the designers will live in Figma / Sketch and so what they produce will not look like what you produce all the time. That said, I don't think the latter is a big deal; Storybook is what the app _currently__ looks like. Figma and so on are what it _might_ look like once implemented.

We use Storybook and I'm of the opinion that it's well worth it. Developing components in isolation can be a big time-saver not because of hot reloading taking a while or whatever, but because you don't have to plumb them in anywhere to work on them. Being able to see what components are available, what they look like, and implementation notes and so on is really nice in a team environment esp. when on board new people.

Lumpy
Apr 26, 2002

La! La! La! Laaaa!



College Slice

prom candy posted:

Start building poo poo asap. The best way to learn is to just kinda get in over your head on a project.

This this this a million times this.

If you have a project up on GitHub that works, has tests, and as a bonus, will deploy on commit (after making sure tests pass for super mega bonus) you are ahead of 90% of the people who already have jobs.

Lumpy
Apr 26, 2002

La! La! La! Laaaa!



College Slice
The problem is it is so easy to do those things these days, coupled with the availability of site builders like Wix and Squarespace, that setting up websites has been commodified to the point that it is a very low paying job even if you manage to do it 30 hours a week. Also, setting up and running email servers is a hell you do not want to wade into.

Lumpy
Apr 26, 2002

La! La! La! Laaaa!



College Slice

Gin_Rummy posted:

Does anyone know of either a guide or a repo giving a solid example on linking a React front end to a Postgres database using Apollo?

The Apollo docs are decent at explaining how to setup Apollo Client and Apollo Server individually, but there isn’t really a lot of information I can find on how they relate to each other and/or the back end.

I mean, there's not much more to it than what you said. Is there something specific that is giving you troubles? You set up the server, have it's resolvers talk to the DB as needed, then your client is configured to point at that server, and makes requests via useQuery.

There's nothing magic about the client / server connection. Apollo client just makes POST requests to the server like you would with Fetch, just in a hook.

Lumpy
Apr 26, 2002

La! La! La! Laaaa!



College Slice

MREBoy posted:

Soliciting help with CSS ok in here or is there another suggested thread ? has to do with width/placing of something on a page

CSS is part of web dev, so ask away.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Lumpy
Apr 26, 2002

La! La! La! Laaaa!



College Slice

Eeyo posted:

Alright, so I'm making a goofy web-1.0 site. Literally just at one html and one css file stage.

I want a pixel art background image. I've set image-rendering to pixelated for the html element, which works in firefox for both background-image and <img> elements. In safari, it renders <img> elements like I want but it does not render the background how I want.

So basically:

code:
html {
  background-image: url("../images/bkg.png");
  background-repeat: repeat;
  image-rendering: pixelated;
}
Any guess as to how I may fix this?

If the image is not being scaled at all, it won't pixelate. Not sure if that is what happening, but that's what should happen (which is nothing.)

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply