WTF Bites
-
@DogsB a modern website that's entirely static files is very useful. Yes, you can make React do the same, but instructions are unclear and it's easy to get something stuck in a ceiling fan. In Gatsby, all-static is the default.
You mean other than the API that powers it that isn’t static?
Yes. Other than the API that powers it and isn't static. Not having to run frontend server lets me put it in CDN which is cheaper and easier to maintain.
-
@DogsB a modern website that's entirely static files is very useful. Yes, you can make React do the same, but instructions are unclear and it's easy to get something stuck in a ceiling fan. In Gatsby, all-static is the default.
If it’s all static files why do you need a “React-based, open-source framework”
Every desktop application is made of 100% static files (well, before cloud hit us that is). Didn't stop them from making rich, highly dynamic GUIs.
The terms "static" and "dynamic" are very overloaded in webdev. They can mean so many different things, and all meanings are used equally common. I have a conspiracy theory that this was fully intentional, to make pro-framework and anti-framework people argue all the time over nothing and breed resentment and force people into echo chambers, constraining spread of good ideas.
-
@Gustav so it’s not a static site then? It’s framework garbage?
-
have a conspiracy theory that this was fully intentional, to make pro-framework and anti-framework people argue all the time over nothing and breed resentment and force people into echo chambers
It's not intentional per se, just ordinary terminal tribalism.
-
@Gustav so it’s not a static site then? It’s framework garbage?
I see that you have fully comprehended this issue perhaps but decided to say this anyway.
-
@DogsB it's fully dynamic framework garbage made of extremely stripped down static files and minimal JS. The end result is the same as back in 2005 when we wrote all our HTML, CSS and JS by hand except it's easier and faster for me to put together. Got it?
-
@DogsB it's fully dynamic framework garbage made of extremely stripped down static files and minimal JS. The end result is the same as back in 2005 when we wrote all our HTML, CSS and JS by hand except it's easier and faster for me to put together. Got it?
No bearing on my original question then. Practically the antithesis of what I asked. Got it?
-
@DogsB no, no I didn't. I completely lost your point a couple posts ago. You're just shitting on frameworks for the sake of shitting on frameworks, or is there more to it?
-
@DogsB no, no I didn't. I completely lost your point a couple post ago. You're just shitting on frameworks for the sake of shitting on frameworks, or is there more to it?
My original question was about dumping frameworks and most js libraries if people actually learned html and css properly. Shitting on frameworks was in built. Welcome to WDTWTF.
-
@DogsB it's fully dynamic framework garbage made of extremely stripped down static files and minimal JS. The end result is the same as back in 2005 when we wrote all our HTML, CSS and JS by hand except it's easier and faster for me to put together. Got it?
No bearing on my original question then. Practically the antithesis of what I asked. Got it?
It's baked on as static, no fry, it sounds like. Why I can see this? I am an adaptive.
-
@DogsB no, no I didn't. I completely lost your point a couple posts ago. You're just shitting on frameworks for the sake of shitting on frameworks, or is there more to it?
Yeah no that was it. Mostly anadaptives here.
-
@DogsB I answered that long ago.
As for going raw and doing vanilla JS only - no, no way in hell. Near impossible to do any decent MVVM/data binding without a framework.
Edit: by vanilla JS, I meant vanilla HTML/CSS/JS. Whether hand-writing or generating them, doing so without a framework of some kind is, will always be, and has always been painful.
-
@DogsB I answered that long ago.
As for going raw and doing vanilla JS only - no, no way in hell. Near impossible to do any decent MVVM/data binding without a framework.
Edit: by vanilla JS, I meant vanilla HTML/CSS/JS. Whether hand-writing or generating them, doing so without a framework of some kind is, will always be, and has always been painful.
Mostly the css /html, js is fully expressive. CSS is rumored to be fully expressive but that expression has the aesthetics of the howls of all the damned, so...
Oh right, and JS needs about half a KLOC of polyfill on average, somehow at all times for 2 fucking decades, to not break any p'clar app / actually be a common subset.
-
@DogsB I answered that long ago.
As for going raw and doing vanilla JS only - no, no way in hell. Near impossible to do any decent MVVM/data binding without a framework.
Edit: by vanilla JS, I meant vanilla HTML/CSS/JS. Whether hand-writing or generating them, doing so without a framework of some kind is, will always be, and has always been painful.
You do like to pack a lot into a couple words and assume everyone knows what you mean.
I always found the frameworks more time consuming. That and 30 line stack traces that tell me nothing. Angular isn't the worst I got to admit. Until I saw what java developers can do with it. I managed to duck that project by threatening to increase my dayrate. I suppose if I hang around long enough, I could increase my day rate and provide fodder for the forum with it.
-
You do like to pack a lot into a couple words and assume everyone knows what you mean.
Welcome to TDWTF.
-
@HardwareGeek said in WTF Bites:
You do like to pack a lot into a couple words and assume everyone knows what you mean.
Welcome to TDWTF.
Ah, so you're bringing that up again.
-
@HardwareGeek said in WTF Bites:
You do like to pack a lot into a couple words and assume everyone knows what you mean.
Welcome to TDWTF.
Ah, so you're bringing that up again.
To be fair... That was one of the forum highlights of last week..
-
That was one of the forum highlights of last week.
Last week? I don't even remember what specific "highlight" you're referring to. But it's a perennial characteristic of some forum members.
-
You do like to pack a lot into a couple words and assume everyone knows what you mean.
@Gustav said in I knew Python was slow, but not THIS slow. And I knew JS was bad, but not THIS bad:
I want to prevent @LaoC from being right, 's all.
Strong @Gąska vibes with this one.
Filed under: bonus goose content (real link)
-
@HardwareGeek said in WTF Bites:
That was one of the forum highlights of last week.
Last week? I don't even remember what specific "highlight" you're referring to. But it's a perennial characteristic of some forum members.
At least I can remember last week.
-
@HardwareGeek said in WTF Bites:
That was one of the forum highlights of last week.
Last week? I don't even remember what specific "highlight" you're referring to. But it's a perennial characteristic of some forum members.
-
@HardwareGeek said in WTF Bites:
That was one of the forum highlights of last week.
Last week? I don't even remember what specific "highlight" you're referring to. But it's a perennial characteristic of some forum members.
That was this week. Do you mean https://what.thedailywtf.com/post/2028455?
-
@sebastian-galczynski the basic problem is that there are too many developers. About half or so need to be fired and go flip burgers instead, and i believe that productivity would go up by doing that.
You, me and the three members of my team worth a dam would volunteer to go burger flipping if we could afford it. I agree with the sentiment but what we need to to is start with the ideas people. I think that would solve a good chunk of the problem.
As long as you don't want a burger. You think an "idea" person would survive there?
-
@sebastian-galczynski the basic problem is that there are too many developers. About half or so need to be fired and go flip burgers instead, and i believe that productivity would go up by doing that.
You, me and the three members of my team worth a dam would volunteer to go burger flipping if we could afford it. I agree with the sentiment but what we need to to is start with the ideas people. I think that would solve a good chunk of the problem.
As long as you don't want a burger. You think an "idea" person would survive there?
You're right. I wouldn't inflict them on that nobel a profession.
Prepare the guillotine!
-
30 line stack traces that tell me nothing.
I'm used to stack traces with 100 elements in them even before considering nested exceptions. They're a
bitlot intimidating the first time, but the trick is usually that virtually all of that is stuff you can totally ignore. Being able to quickly spot the relevant frames is just a matter of practice.Angular isn't the worst I got to admit. Until I saw what java developers can do with it.
Bwahahahahahaaaa!
Sorry. Don't know what came over me. I've never used Angular. But I have done things with generated code that terrified my colleagues, especially when they apparently worked first time, and that seems to be an attitude held by other Java programmers too...
-
-
Being able to quickly spot the relevant frames is just a matter of practice.
"Basically, anything not looking like framework shit."
-
@Tsaukpaetra said in WTF Bites:
Being able to quickly spot the relevant frames is just a matter of practice.
"Basically, anything not looking like framework shit."
Most of the time. Except when it is a problem that expresses itself at the framework layer (usually caused by a misconfiguration, but bugs do happen there too).
First time I hit that issue was when I put in code to automatically remove all framework frames from logged stack traces and had easy debugging for two weeks before getting a show-stopper with an (apparently) empty trace. It was a framework priority inversion bug combined with a minor error in how I'd set up dispatch routes, and it took some hunting before I reported it upstream, but I did learn my lesson: no stack trimming!
-
@dkf but do you realize how much damage can be done with those authorizations? Your entire business might go poof for hours, maybe days, and it will take weeks to sort out everything that got lost since last backup, especially if anything financial happened.
I'm not saying not to authorize your app to do things it needs to do. I'm saying that since you already authorized it to do so, and don't consider it to be a critical risk to your service's survivability - how much would you be gaining by sandboxing really, and is all the extra effort actually worth anything?
Vulnerabilities I don't
readthink about can't hurt me!
-
30 line stack traces that tell me nothing.
I'm used to stack traces with 100 elements in them even before considering nested exceptions. They're a
bitlot intimidating the first time, but the trick is usually that virtually all of that is stuff you can totally ignore. Being able to quickly spot the relevant frames is just a matter of practice.Mostly you just search for where your code's package hierarchy starts showing up.
-
@boomzilla said in WTF Bites:
@dkf but do you realize how much damage can be done with those authorizations? Your entire business might go poof for hours, maybe days, and it will take weeks to sort out everything that got lost since last backup, especially if anything financial happened.
I'm not saying not to authorize your app to do things it needs to do. I'm saying that since you already authorized it to do so, and don't consider it to be a critical risk to your service's survivability - how much would you be gaining by sandboxing really, and is all the extra effort actually worth anything?
Vulnerabilities I don't
readthink about can't hurt me!Cost vs. benefit. You add a lot of extra work to deployment, and it only protects against a very small subset out of all vulnerabilities you could possibly have. It also gives you false sense of security, which can be a huge problem depending on how self-righteous you are. If you haven't fucked up basic input validation, you're just as safe with or without WAsm sandbox. And if you did fuck up, you have much bigger problems than lack of WAsm sandbox.
-
@Gustav Bit of an inside joke. A former forum member used to advocate that if you didn't read EULAs, you weren't bound by their terms.
-
@HardwareGeek said in WTF Bites:
@Gustav Bit of an inside joke. A former forum member used to advocate that if you didn't read EULAs, you weren't bound by their terms.
Which is of course non-sense, but as usual has a grain of truth. Shrink-wrap licenses, that you can't even theoretically read before buying, are unenforcable garbage. Doesn't stop anyone from suing you for seventy bajillion trillion dollars.
-
and nobody reads licenses anyway
I do, occasionally, not very often. I'm always happy when it's something like GPL, which I have read before. Yes, I know it's a terrible, viral license, but I have absolutely no interest in modifying or redistributing the code, I just want to use the software, and I know nothing in there restricts my ability to do that in any way.
-
@HardwareGeek it’s a great license for the user, in this case you.
-
are unenforcable garbage.
Well.....it depends on exactly what they say and what jurisdiction you're in. A lot of them have unenforceable clauses (in most of the US, at least), but they also have large chunks that are very enforceable and have been enforced strongly.
-
@HardwareGeek it’s a great license for the user, in this case you.
Mileage varies depending on e you’re trying to do. E.g. if you’re trying to interoperate with BSD software, you’re kinda up shit creek.
-
@HardwareGeek it’s a great license for the user, in this case you.
Mileage varies depending on e you’re trying to do. E.g. if you’re trying to interoperate with BSD software, you’re kinda up shit creek.
No. In his case as the user ("I just want to use the software, and I know nothing in there restricts my ability to do that in any way"), there's nothing stopping you from doing that.
-
@topspin in his case, sure. In my case, mileage varies.
-
Soon.
-
Mmmh. Disney+ stopped working under Linux since last time I've subscribed. Not like there's an error, just a black window. 5 minutes of Google, and apparently they're looking at the user agent. Switch UA and things work again.
Printing some sort of error that my browser/OS isn't officially supported? Yeah, lame, but perhaps understandable.
DRM.. maybe. I get it, sort of. I mean, I don't think it's particularly useful, but whatever. Everybody does it, so why not jump on the bandwagon.
Looking at UA and then ... not doing anything? Why even bother? What's the point?
Edit: There's this post (warning: reddit) even. Apparently they're not even whitelisting. Who let the intern at the production code again?
-
Who let the intern at the production code again?
Must be hiring the Twitter cast offs.
-
@Benjamin-Hall said in WTF Bites:
are unenforcable garbage.
Well.....it depends on exactly what they say and what jurisdiction you're in. A lot of them have unenforceable clauses (in most of the US, at least), but they also have large chunks that are very enforceable and have been enforced strongly.
There was this trend years ago to buy a Windows-powered laptop, record yourself declining license, then demand partial refund on the laptop. Some of them were successful. Some of them even appeared in court and won.
-
Who let the intern at the production code again?
Must be hiring the Twitter cast offs.
Who let the CEO at the production code again?
-
LOL. The salt is strong with this one.
-
-
LOL. The salt is strong with this one.
Yeah, @Mason_Wheeler downvoted like every single post in that chain. Is they always like that?
-
-
that is, the downvotes are supposed to say boomzilla whatever the number of times the downvote count is, not any other user
The user it shows instead of the real downvoter is configurable - it's currently Mason_Wheeler but it's been others in the past.
-
LOL. The salt is strong with this one.
Yeah, @Mason_Wheeler downvoted like every single post in that chain. Is they always like that?
Hmm...is that correct? Shouldn't it be "Are they always like that?"
Of course, that's still less correct than "Is he always like that?"