|
clockwork automaton posted:
CS0449?
|
# ¿ Oct 30, 2011 07:01 |
|
|
# ¿ Apr 25, 2024 15:14 |
|
DotFortune posted:To be fair/make things infinitely worse, this person was going to write different routines for each case: each case being the different positions of records of a csv. But each row was to have 27 records, so the idea was that he was dealing with two rows at a time. What. I would have just said "no" but maybe I'm kind of a dick?
|
# ¿ Dec 4, 2011 04:45 |
|
Janin posted:
Holy poo poo.
|
# ¿ Dec 12, 2011 05:42 |
|
shrughes posted:In Coffeescript: Comprehensions in Coffeescript are also not monadic: code:
code:
code:
code:
Look Around You fucked around with this message at 01:59 on Dec 13, 2011 |
# ¿ Dec 13, 2011 01:53 |
|
Vanadium posted:Well, the first example is more like [ [ (x, y) | x <- [ 0..3] ] | y <- [4..8] ] EDIT: wait no.. How so? If it were monadic it would return a [[0,5], [0,6], ...] instead of [[[0,5],[0,6]..][[1,5],...]]] E2: I see what you mean, that still doesn't make sense for coffeescript to do it that way by default... I would expect a list comp to produce a flat list of the results, which in this case is a list of two integers. How would you represent the haskell thing in coffeescript then? Look Around You fucked around with this message at 02:12 on Dec 13, 2011 |
# ¿ Dec 13, 2011 02:05 |
|
shrughes posted:That's just a parsing thing, it's parsing it as ([x,y] for x in [0..3]) for y in [4..8] Yeah, I see that, but if it's parsing it like that, there doesn't seem to be a way to get it to parse it the way one would expect it to parse it.
|
# ¿ Dec 13, 2011 02:18 |
|
Jabor posted:Doesn't Meat Boy have a level editor for Super Meat World? If so, then Insert is an obvious privilege to have and not at all strange. Worst case you get a bunch of junk in the database that you need to prune out. (Okay, actual worst-case is impersonating another user for the purpose of uploading levels which is pretty bad, but it's not a huge exploit) Wouldn't it make more sense to send a request to a web api and have a separate server application handle the actual SQL stuff? I mean I would think it'd be a lot safer than having the game directly connect to the database, especially if it's possible for someone to find the login stuff from the binary.
|
# ¿ Dec 23, 2011 12:56 |
|
Markov Chain Chomp posted:To be fair, what you guys are doing is blaming the victim. It's not any more convincing than when people blame women for being raped. This is a loving terrible attempt at an analogy and it's actually pretty insulting.
|
# ¿ Dec 24, 2011 22:18 |
|
Nippashish posted:Horrible analogy aside, he's completely right. So everyone rushing and taking down the db was not cool, I'll agree there. The issue here though is that he was told about a vulnerability and not only refused to take steps to fix it, but he actually took a condescending stance towards someone pointing out a massive security hole. When he took that stance, pretty much the only way to get any action done was to act on the vulnerability. I mean, this doesn't seem so serious at this point because it was only levels or whatever, but what if in the future he decided to put in in-app purchases and decided to store payment data or credit card info in there or whatever? It's not a leap to figure he'd do that with the attitude he was taking, and that's where the real problem is.
|
# ¿ Dec 24, 2011 22:33 |
|
Nippashish posted:"When she went out dressed like that pretty much the only thing that could have happened did. It's not a leap to figure out what a man would do after seeing her, and that's where the real problem is." I was going to write out a response to how the two do not compare at all but this is so loving ridiculous that it's not even worth it.
|
# ¿ Dec 24, 2011 23:06 |
|
Markov Chain Chomp posted:What people did to the db was literally the worst-case scenario for what could have happened and you can't assume he would have used a similar setup for actual payment stuff like that. That's just lazy for you to make that point. You can't assume that he wouldn't have either, especially judging by his blasé responses that "everything is fine" when it clearly isn't (people rendered the game unplayable with this exploit). Markov Chain Chomp posted:How do they differ at all? Fine. Nobody is relying on the girl to dress "not like a slut" or what the gently caress ever because they (potentially) have personal assets on the line. The way she dresses has no bearing on whether my money is where it should be at the end of the day. Conversely, people DO rely on stored information to be secure, just like they rely (as an above poster mentioned) on a bank vault being locked and secured. Accessing the database to get the guy to (hopefully) fix poo poo before people potentially get personal information stolen is nowhere near the same as someone raping a girl to prove I don't even loving know because this does not make sense to do. As I stated, based on his reaction, there is no way you can make any assumptions as to what he'll do with more sensitive data when he is already making horrible decisions (this setup is a horrible decision) and trying to justify them based on his "knowledge" of how to do things.
|
# ¿ Dec 24, 2011 23:16 |
|
Dicky B posted:indie_game_developers.txt http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=YtBZ68Fx1Kw that quote 1:34 "I'm like in a loving concentration camp [...] is another good one. I think they're both this dude?
|
# ¿ Dec 25, 2011 05:26 |
|
point of return posted:Fast Eddie's idea of "fixing" Solstace's page. As you can see, by replacing the hottips with something that doesn't parse, you, too, can claim your page is fixed. Haha that's amazing.
|
# ¿ Jan 1, 2012 22:38 |
|
Hoooly gently caress. So after some discussion(starting there and going till the end of the thread right now) in the General Programming thread about why a guy had to put eval(input(prompt)) instead of input(prompt), I looked it up in the docs. Apparently in python 2.x (including the current version, 2.7.2), input() is is the same as eval(raw_input()). This was fixed for python 3.x but still holy poo poo. And the worst part is that pretty much every tutorial has you use input with it's implicit eval and even relying on it to convert the results without a second thought (and without even mentioning it). I have no idea how they thought a built in function named input should automatically and implicitly do an eval on the raw stuff it gets. Like god drat.
|
# ¿ Jan 17, 2012 07:41 |
|
xf86enodev posted:Python should finally catch up and release their docs on youtube! I mean I could see that with more obscure api calls, but a function named input should probably be a safe way of getting input. And as was said, most documentation aimed at beginners says to use input, not raw_input. I just have no idea why they thought that a function just named input should eval what it gets implicitly. It's loving stupid.
|
# ¿ Jan 18, 2012 01:50 |
|
Plorkyeran posted:http://codepad.org/mQ1GHYeS This is amazing.
|
# ¿ Jan 19, 2012 06:04 |
|
Aleksei Vasiliev posted:Pretty sure he's crazy. The newsletter is a rant about some judge violating his human rights, and demands 2mil EUR from the German chancellor. Can we send him a huge rear end fake €2,000,000 note so that he publishes it or would that be illegal/immoral?
|
# ¿ Jan 23, 2012 05:23 |
|
Doc Hawkins posted:Oh, it's not an awful language. In fact, it's not a language at all. What the gently caress is this poo poo? Like I honestly have no idea how he's saying that a turing complete language that's actually pretty powerful despite having a simple syntax isn't a language. this dumbfuck posted:Years ago I read something which explained, in my opinion, why Lisp has never achieved the mainstream adoption its passionate advocates believe it deserves. Lisp projects experience a degree of balkanization because everything is left wide open; you can use more than one object-oriented paradigm (potentially even at the same time), you write your own this, you write your own that, you write your own everything. I don't know any extremely popular languages which provide a few simple but powerful constructs. Wait, Lua is pretty widespread and it has no built in OO system. I just e: I mean lisp definitely isn't mainstream probably because it's not the most readable thing ever (and because most people aren't 100% comfortable with functional programming), but that certainly doesn't mean it's not a powerful programming language. Look Around You fucked around with this message at 03:38 on Jan 24, 2012 |
# ¿ Jan 24, 2012 03:35 |
|
TRex EaterofCars posted:It's even worse because he basically takes a Douglas Crockford's "Javascript is Lisp in C's clothing" and deranges it beyond reason. He then goes on to claim that Lisp is simply for AST manipulation and really isn't abstract enough to handle pragmatic programming. Yeah I saw that and shut my brain off because I couldn't comprehend just how loving stupid this guy is. Like jesus christ. e: I mean the least insane point he has I guess is the "it lacks some built in stuff" but that doesn't really keep a language from being a language. Just loving christ that guy. Look Around You fucked around with this message at 04:33 on Jan 24, 2012 |
# ¿ Jan 24, 2012 04:30 |
|
Plorkyeran posted:Lua has syntax and features explicitly intended for prototype-based OOP. Yeah but I mean so does Javascript.
|
# ¿ Jan 24, 2012 04:33 |
|
Plorkyeran posted:And Lisp doesn't, which is what he was talking about there. Common Lisp also has CLOS as part of its ANSI standard. And honestly you don't absolutely need objects in a functional language.
|
# ¿ Jan 24, 2012 04:44 |
|
Doc Hawkins posted:I dunno about that. After all, here we are, reacting to it. I guess I'm just wondering if anyone who knows poo poo about development/CS/etc would ever want to hire someone this loving stupid. I don't even think anyone takes Joel Spolsky seriously anymore, other than that he helped found StackOverflow or whatever. e: Well anyone important anyway.
|
# ¿ Jan 24, 2012 05:12 |
|
Suspicious Dish posted:There's another whole side of metaprogramming: C even has a side of this, since it has no OOP by default. You can still get a lot of work done right out of the box, though. I've browsed through the GObject documentation a bit but still don't entirely comprehend it all. It seems like a lot of it relies on how C requires structs to be laid out in memory though.
|
# ¿ Jan 24, 2012 05:28 |
|
BonzoESC posted:Doesn't C++ have the same implementation? Yeah, multiple inheritance fucks poo poo up. I'm pretty sure GObject uses vtables though which I think most C++ compilers use for virtual functions.
|
# ¿ Jan 24, 2012 05:55 |
|
edit: I'm a big huge retard who doesn't think before he posts when he's tired and poo poo Mozilla is developing a new language called rust. It seems to aim to be sort of C-ish but with new features kind of like Go I guess but unlike Go it's incredibly incohesive. Interesting facts from their tutorial
It looks like it has some potential but it seems to have an identity crisis. It's trying to be a bit of everything but it doesn't seem to fit heavily in anything. Unsafe pointers, but a heavy functional emphasis. It's hard to tell exactly what they're getting at and in the end it just looks like a mash of line noise like perl. I guess my biggest issue is that in trying to make it look like C/C++ it really betrays it's highly functional nature. I just really don't know where they're going with it. example from their standard library: code:
edit: Well after sleeping a few hours I realize that I guess () can be an empty tuple, which the language does have. I still stand by it being a bit of an abuse of notation though. Look Around You fucked around with this message at 14:24 on Jan 28, 2012 |
# ¿ Jan 28, 2012 07:46 |
|
shrughes posted:stuff making me look dumb Especially the blowing up thing, I definitely didn't think that through at all. Basically posting tired is stupid and makes you look stupid. e: tef posted:
Yeah I'm basically retarded and thought things through like not at all and ended up making an rear end out of myself posting like an idiot at 2 am. Look Around You fucked around with this message at 14:21 on Jan 28, 2012 |
# ¿ Jan 28, 2012 14:19 |
|
Scaramouche posted:Don't feel too bad, shrughes is basically a jerk. It's kind of his thing. I don't feel bad really (and I don't hold it against him), I just feel dumb because I posted a kneejerk reaction of something without taking much time to figure out reasons behind it. Maybe part of it was I wasn't able to get a feel for the goals and stuff of the language right away, but that's not really an excuse for me posting retarded poo poo, that's just me not taking the time to comprehend something and then spouting poo poo off about ideas that I only half understood.
|
# ¿ Jan 29, 2012 06:05 |
|
tef posted:We're all terrible. Basically yeah, I didn't try it and was talking about impressions I got from the documentation. Interestingly enough, while I was writing that post I was compiling the Rust compiler/toolsuite. I still haven't gotten around to trying it yet but it does look interesting. It certainly wasn't fair of me to pass judgement without trying it. That said I still have some confusion about the ; thing and the () for nil thing, but overall they're pretty minor. (the problem I have with () for nil is that in rust specifically tuples need to have arity strictly greater than 1, so an empty tuple for nil doesn't really make much sense to me.)
|
# ¿ Jan 31, 2012 05:15 |
|
The problem I have with "a block returns it's last value if it has no semicolon" is a couple things. Here's an example which compiles fine and acts like you'd expect: code:
code:
code:
The error descriptions that the compiler generates are pretty good but that's kind of a weird, subtle bug IMO.
|
# ¿ Jan 31, 2012 13:54 |
|
Mr.Radar posted:They could done macros that calculated the seconds from given time periods, e.g. I would like to know how they are going to a) use macros in a language which has none and b) rely on compilation optimization in a language which is not compiled. (yes I know that the ruby interpreter could do this [and in fact probably does] but I don't know if that's good to rely on if you need the response time that they are apparently aiming for with this library)
|
# ¿ Feb 1, 2012 20:32 |
|
evensevenone posted:Would this make you feel better? The last thing is evaluated always returned. Statements are separated by semicolons. if you put a semicolon, and there is nothing after it, what is returned is the evaluation of nothing, which is nil. This discussion has passed and I don't have the rust compiler on this computer but is block-keyword { ; stuff } legal? Add to that the fact that a stray semicolon will literally cause a compilation error even if it's in a space where they almost always are legal and you have a problem IMO. edit: and I'm not sure "pay more attention when you code" is applicable here; thinking extremely hard about the placement of a ";" is probably not the best usage of a developer's time. Especially when an extremely subtle one character difference (that looks legal) is a compilation error. edit(again): removed retarded incorrect statement made due to lack of sleep (this is a running theme) Look Around You fucked around with this message at 11:53 on Feb 3, 2012 |
# ¿ Feb 3, 2012 11:11 |
|
Optimus Prime Ribs posted:I've never seen that goofy "more than one dollar sign" poo poo in PHP before, but just what the hell is it supposed to do? Apparently they are "variable variables": PHP docs posted:Variable variables
|
# ¿ Feb 13, 2012 18:57 |
|
Suspicious Dish posted:Oh, the rabbit hole goes much deeper than that. Jesus christ what the gently caress. Why do people still use this garbage?
|
# ¿ Feb 14, 2012 04:18 |
|
Haystack posted:LAMP stacks made it really, really easy for beginners and non-technical people to start web programming, and it kind of built inertia from there. Yeah but at some point you'd think people would realize just how loving terrible PHP is all around, as a language and with it's libraries... Who am I kidding people are loving retarded and would rather straight up cut and paste things and cobble together piles of poo poo than put any effort in at all.
|
# ¿ Feb 14, 2012 04:50 |
|
taqueso posted:For a lot of people, copy/pasting and getting things to barely work is a massive amount of effort. This is true. I'm pretty behind in actual courses taken in my CS program due to a few years of health issues, but in my "intro to systems programming" class or whatever last semester, we spent the first 4 or 5 weeks just learning C and comparing it to (gently caress) Java. The last project of the semester was writing a simplified HTTP server with pthreads that responds to GET requests. This kid in my class asked me a couple days before the project was due (and a day or so before the final) if function parameters in C were passed by copy or not
|
# ¿ Feb 14, 2012 05:04 |
|
Optimus Prime Ribs posted:I've never heard "pass by value" be referred to as "pass by copy" before, but yes. There's no references in C. Everything is passed by value (he also said copy and not value so I reproduced it), if you need to change it you explicitly pass it a pointer, and even then the actual pointer is passed by value. References are entirely a C++ thing.
|
# ¿ Feb 14, 2012 16:39 |
|
Internet Janitor posted:I don't really see what's so strange about it. I guess it's strange because in most contexts you expect it to auto-(un)box so intuitively it should work. But it doesn't there. The following prints "true" for example: code:
|
# ¿ Feb 16, 2012 01:58 |
|
Look Around You posted:I guess it's strange because in most contexts you expect it to auto-(un)box so intuitively it should work. But it doesn't there. Obviously this is better than undefined behavior of unboxing a null but that's the problem with nullable reference types in a language where you're pretty required to use objects for things.
|
# ¿ Feb 16, 2012 02:18 |
|
JewKiller 3000 posted:[pointers vs references] There's a lot of good points here. I haven't done much C++ programming, but I do know there's const parameters to functions and I guess I was wondering how much they're used; const correctness seems pretty hard to implement correctly but it seems like it would help things out w.r.t. passing stack allocated things. Especially because stack allocation is a huge feature in C++ that allows RAII and automatic cleanup of locals without manual memory management/garbage collection.
|
# ¿ Feb 16, 2012 04:42 |
|
|
# ¿ Apr 25, 2024 15:14 |
|
Zombywuf posted:So, apparently this thread hates functions that mutate their arguments. I don't hate it but I like knowing whether or not calling a function will change it's arguments. That's the big thing about it for me. The worst part about this in Java is that since all object arguments to functions are passed via a copy of it's reference and there's absolutely no way to specify const-ness you have no idea what the gently caress that function does to your poo poo half the time if you didn't write it. Also a lot of people writing Java think that AnObject x = new AnObject(); AnObject y = x; means that y gets a copy of the object x instead of becoming a copy of the reference to x which is pretty bad too. e: MEAT TREAT posted:Ding ding ding. This is why Null Integers are useful. I agree that they're useful sometimes, but not by default.
|
# ¿ Feb 16, 2012 17:54 |