Google Cloud Platform and near-perfect documentation
-
@pie_flavor said in Google Cloud Platform and near-perfect documentation:
@boomzilla https://poi.apache.org/apidocs/org/apache/poi/ss/usermodel/Sheet.html#addMergedRegion-org.apache.poi.ss.util.CellRangeAddress-
HAHAHA! There's no such class! I believe you're linking to the 4.0 docs.
-
@Benjamin-Hall said in Google Cloud Platform and near-perfect documentation:
I see no benefit and lots of downside.
box
What's not to love?
-
@Kian said in Google Cloud Platform and near-perfect documentation:
Because I imagine that if you have a bunch of js developers already, almost anything you could want them to do would be better served by using js than introducing Rust.
To be fair I'd probably want them to go away, which can be served better by Rust devs.
-
@boomzilla said in Google Cloud Platform and near-perfect documentation:
I'm using Apache POI to build Excel workbooks
I had to do that once. My condolences.
-
@loopback0 said in Google Cloud Platform and near-perfect documentation:
@boomzilla said in Google Cloud Platform and near-perfect documentation:
I'm using Apache POI to build Excel workbooks
I had to do that once. My condolences.
It's pretty straightforward once I worked out the stuff I needed. Just frustrating that I have to use a weird combination of docs and autocomplete to figure out how to make things work.
Oh, and when I look up stackoverflow answers everything is slightly different, too. Like, most of my classes are prefixed with
HSSF
but on there everyone is usingXSSF
prefixed classes.
-
@boomzilla said in Google Cloud Platform and near-perfect documentation:
Like, most of my classes are prefixed with HSSF but on there everyone is using XSSF prefixed classes.
So you're creating Excel documents in the pre-2007 format?
-
@boomzilla said in Google Cloud Platform and near-perfect documentation:
How did they even build the javadocs?
They didn't?
-
@pie_flavor said in Google Cloud Platform and near-perfect documentation:
I'm talking about ideal software solutions.
Ideals schmideals. Real code isn't ideal, but it delivers real value to real people.
-
@loopback0 said in Google Cloud Platform and near-perfect documentation:
@boomzilla said in Google Cloud Platform and near-perfect documentation:
Like, most of my classes are prefixed with HSSF but on there everyone is using XSSF prefixed classes.
So you're creating Excel documents in the pre-2007 format?
Oh...I guess that makes sense. Apparently. Seems like the newer formats started being supported in POI 3.1. I suppose I should upgrade, but meh. It works.
-
@dkf said in Google Cloud Platform and near-perfect documentation:
@pie_flavor said in Google Cloud Platform and near-perfect documentation:
I'm talking about ideal software solutions.
Ideals schmideals. Real code isn't ideal, but it delivers real value to real people.
In any case faffing about with pointers can't possibly be included in any ideal software solution.
-
@Benjamin-Hall said in Google Cloud Platform and near-perfect documentation:
@pie_flavor said in Google Cloud Platform and near-perfect documentation:
@Benjamin-Hall Yes, the correct answer was WebAssembly. Both Safari and Safari iOS have full WebAssembly support.
So I'd need a compiler,
as with any language,
learn a horribly-obfuscated language (yes, rust is full of colon cancer just like C++),
Where do people get this idea that this is obfuscated?
.
is instance member operator,::
is non-instance member operator. It's really simple.learn a separate set of APIs (both webAssembly and the DOM), and for what benefit?
For the benefit of increased performance and not using JS. Also, wasm doesn't have an API per se.
These were small scripts to get called locally. Chance of meaningful resource leakage: 0%. Chance of incorrect behavior: 0% for actual program errors, 100% for logic errors (which rust doesn't help with).
In addition, to call these WebAssembly functions, I'd still need to learn JS, because that's the interface.
False. DOM API != JS.
So you're talking about orders of magnitude more work, with absolutely no benefit. It's the cost of learning/making the JS thing + the cost of learning rust and making the packages there.
Vs the cost of learning/making the JS thing + the cost of learning JS + the mental cost of using JS.
I see no benefit and lots of downside.
That's okay; that's why you have me.
-
@dkf said in Google Cloud Platform and near-perfect documentation:
@pie_flavor said in Google Cloud Platform and near-perfect documentation:
I'm talking about ideal software solutions.
Ideals schmideals. Real code isn't ideal, but it delivers real value to real people.
Thanks, blakey.
-
@boomzilla said in Google Cloud Platform and near-perfect documentation:
@dkf said in Google Cloud Platform and near-perfect documentation:
@pie_flavor said in Google Cloud Platform and near-perfect documentation:
I'm talking about ideal software solutions.
Ideals schmideals. Real code isn't ideal, but it delivers real value to real people.
In any case faffing about with pointers can't possibly be included in any ideal software solution.
out
andref
in C# would like a word with you.
-
@pie_flavor No, the way you call wasm code from the browser is by calling JS APIs. So you still need JS.
You really don't understand tradeoffs and context, do you? JS is nearly painless for the simple tasks I need. Yes, if you're writing desktop software or mission-critical-must-be-perfect-run-forever software, JS is bad. But for DOM-monkeying? It's great.
Oh, and performance? The performance of this code was dominated by user input time. Like orders and orders of magnitude. At worst it ran for < 250 ms/assignment. Total. Over many pages. Often the lag in browser update time (on an old iPad) was longer than the runtime of this code.
Spending orders of magnitude more time for a trivial increase in performance is the very definition of foolish optimization.
-
@Benjamin-Hall But you don't have to learn JS. Just like I don't have to learn C to call C functions. I can read a function signature, and write a binding for it in Rust, and the only thing I actually have to know is what data types from C map to what data types in
libc
. I interact with both static and dynamic C libraries frequently with Rust, and I still know no more about C than when I started, save for the knowledge that libraries typically have a special freeing function for pointers that get passed to you.
-
@pie_flavor said in Google Cloud Platform and near-perfect documentation:
@Benjamin-Hall But you don't have to learn JS. Just like I don't have to learn C to call C functions. I can read a function signature, and write a binding for it in Rust, and the only thing I actually have to know is what data types from C map to what data types in
libc
. I interact with both static and dynamic C libraries frequently with Rust, and I still know no more about C than when I started, save for the knowledge that libraries typically have a special freeing function for pointers that get passed to you.But you still need JS. Because that's what you're writing. To actually hook the wasm code to browser input. So you still need to do all the DOM stuff to get the elements in the first place.
You don't understand the real world, do you? I'm entirely self-taught in a bunch of languages and platforms. I don't do theoretical programming. Everything I do is to support a real need. As an unpaid part of my job and life. I don't have time to faff about with "optimal" methods. I need stuff done. Ease of writing trumps any trivial performance or other theoretical concerns.
-
@Benjamin-Hall said in Google Cloud Platform and near-perfect documentation:
But you still need JS. Because that's what you're writing. To actually hook the wasm code to browser input. So you still need to do all the DOM stuff to get the elements in the first place.
No. The total amount of JS you will ever need to write:
import * as wasm from "my-wasm-crate"; wasm.init();
Assuming your 'main' function is
init
.
-
@pie_flavor said in Google Cloud Platform and near-perfect documentation:
@Benjamin-Hall said in Google Cloud Platform and near-perfect documentation:
But you still need JS. Because that's what you're writing. To actually hook the wasm code to browser input. So you still need to do all the DOM stuff to get the elements in the first place.
No.
That contradicts all the information I was able to find on MDN. But either way, it's still extreme amounts of work for no benefit whatsoever. Unless spending months to shave milliseconds off a UI-bound process is a benefit. Since I generate these files dynamically on a server I control from a template (with small modifications) for my CDN-like host (hooking in through the school's LMS), I don't need to install compilers on that shared hosting (a huge benefit), I don't need to recompile whenever I rejigger something (I can instead open the affected files directly and re-upload).
Not to mention, when I wrote it neither safari nor mobile safari supported WASM at all. I wrote this back for iOS 10 and have only tweaked it since.
-
@pie_flavor said in Google Cloud Platform and near-perfect documentation:
@Benjamin-Hall said in Google Cloud Platform and near-perfect documentation:
But you still need JS. Because that's what you're writing. To actually hook the wasm code to browser input. So you still need to do all the DOM stuff to get the elements in the first place.
No. The total amount of JS you will ever need to write:
import * as wasm from "my-wasm-crate"; wasm.init();
Assuming your 'main' function is
init
.But I don't have a 'main' function. I don't need one. Instead I have a bunch of special-purpose functions, all packed into one file. One set deals with checking the correctness of a single problem, the other set deal with checking a whole assignment and doing the AJAX postback.
Edit: and you said that it didn't need any JS. Which you then contradicted. Oh, and you need ECMA6 to do that whole import statement. Which, let me tell you, is theoretically supported (but not very well in practice). As I said, you don't understand the real world. Which makes sense because you're still in the student mode.
-
@Benjamin-Hall said in Google Cloud Platform and near-perfect documentation:
@pie_flavor said in Google Cloud Platform and near-perfect documentation:
@Benjamin-Hall said in Google Cloud Platform and near-perfect documentation:
But you still need JS. Because that's what you're writing. To actually hook the wasm code to browser input. So you still need to do all the DOM stuff to get the elements in the first place.
No. The total amount of JS you will ever need to write:
import * as wasm from "my-wasm-crate"; wasm.init();
Assuming your 'main' function is
init
.But I don't have a 'main' function. I don't need one. Instead I have a bunch of special-purpose functions, all packed into one file. One set deals with checking the correctness of a single problem, the other set deal with checking a whole assignment and doing the AJAX postback.
Right. The main function would be the equivalent of the JS code which isn't part of any function; i.e. where you register listeners, etc.
Edit: and you said that it didn't need any JS. Which you then contradicted.
That's and you know it. This is a copy-paste operation.
Oh, and you need ECMA6 to do that whole import statement. Which, let me tell you, is theoretically supported (but not very well in practice). As I said, you don't understand the real world. Which makes sense because you're still in the student mode.
You don't need dynamic import, which is the one that's not well-supported. Everything that supports wasm, supports bare-bones ES6 importation at least.
-
@pie_flavor it does now. It didn't even I wrote the code. I had to work around that specifically. Mobile Safari is dumb.
In all of this, webasm is doing all the work. Why learn rust for that when I can use c# or python, both of which also compile to wasm and both of which I already know? What does rust specifically bring to the table for this case (where performance and resources are both negligibly impacted even by the most naive code)?
-
@Benjamin-Hall Performance is in fact much better with Rust. Not to mention download size.
That's the same question as 'why should I learn C++ to make a game when I already know Java really well', really. It would be more efficient for you to just write it in Java, but you'd end up with a more efficient program if you wrote it in C++, and learning C++ would come in useful many times in your programming career even if you write Java for a living until the day you retire.
-
@pie_flavor but the point was that for this case performance is irrelevant.
Talking to you is like talking to someone who keeps insisting that the grandma needs to buy a hyper car because it's much faster when all she really needs is a golf cart. Different systems for different uses. For this case in particular anything beyond simple vanilla.js would be overkill.
-
@Benjamin-Hall and the reason she buys a golf cart is because it is much cheaper.
there is no additional expense to writing it in Rust.
-
@pie_flavor no, because she lives in one of those retirement communities where only golf carts are allowed. Or she has no need for the extra features and they'd only cause issues.
Transition costs are real costs. Rust is not easy to learn, specifically for the same reasons it's powerful. Thus, using it over something I already know is a cost. One denominated in my most precious commodity: time.
You live in a fantasy world where we always have the luxury of infinite lead time and resources to learn new tools. But that's just a fantasy world. Try living in the real one where good enough and now beat better and later.
Oh, and figuring out how to install a transpiler on shared hosting without root and how to trigger it via AJAX call (or pack around extra files for config when I can't do anything server side on the actual host and everything has to be directly served by AWS in it's most braindead mode) is a cost. A huge one that is super fragile whenever the LMS changes things. Which is frequently.
-
@Benjamin-Hall said in Google Cloud Platform and near-perfect documentation:
@pie_flavor no, because she lives in one of those retirement communities where only golf carts are allowed. Or she has no need for the extra features and they'd only cause issues.
Transition costs are real costs. Rust is not easy to learn, specifically for the same reasons it's powerful. Thus, using it over something I already know is a cost. One denominated in my most precious commodity: time.
You didn't read my earlier response about Java, did you?
Oh, and figuring out how to install a transpiler on shared hosting without root and how to trigger it via AJAX call (or pack around extra files for config when I can't do anything server side on the actual host and everything has to be directly served by AWS in it's most braindead mode) is a cost. A huge one that is super fragile whenever the LMS changes things. Which is frequently.
What does root have to do with anything?
-
@boomzilla said in Google Cloud Platform and near-perfect documentation:
@pie_flavor said in Google Cloud Platform and near-perfect documentation:
@boomzilla said in Google Cloud Platform and near-perfect documentation:
@pie_flavor said in Google Cloud Platform and near-perfect documentation:
@boomzilla said in Google Cloud Platform and near-perfect documentation:
There are a lot of reasons to like js over rust for certain applications.
I declare that there is not one single application where JS would do better than Rust.
No one gives a shit.
And yet you're still responding to me.
Oh, I mean that no one cares that you have a ridiculous opinion about your favorite programming language. It's still fun to respond to you.
If only there were someone @pie_flavor could have learned this fact from by observation...
-
@pie_flavor said in Google Cloud Platform and near-perfect documentation:
What does root have to do with anything?
Programs don't exist in isolation. They're part of an environment that provides the facilities the program needs to perform it's goal.
Root access makes setting up the environment more easy than not having it. Suppose he had someone who was able to perfectly write and maintain the code of the program in rust. He now has a text file. Everything else needed to make that text file useful is the environment.
-
@Kian said in Google Cloud Platform and near-perfect documentation:
@pie_flavor said in Google Cloud Platform and near-perfect documentation:
What does root have to do with anything?
Programs don't exist in isolation. They're part of an environment that provides the facilities the program needs to perform it's goal.
Root access makes setting up the environment more easy than not having it. Suppose he had someone who was able to perfectly write and maintain the code of the program in rust. He now has a text file. Everything else needed to make that text file useful is the environment.
Thanks for the philosophical discussion about environments. Root still has nothing to do with the Rust build process.
-
@pie_flavor how do you install the rust compiler?
-
@Kian On Windows you download and install the binary (which doesn't require elevation). On non-Windows you run
curl https://sh.rustup.rs -sSf | sh
.
-
@pie_flavor said in Google Cloud Platform and near-perfect documentation:
@Kian On Windows you download and install the binary (which doesn't require elevation). On non-Windows you run
curl https://sh.rustup.rs -sSf | sh
.I can't curl, that's blocked by the hosting.
Edit and as usual you focused on one little thing and ignored the rest. For my case I'd have to jerry-rig a build process that would end up being fragile in multiple ways. As opposed to just including a mostly static text file in a zip. And if I needed to change anything I'd have to muck around quite a bit instead of a simple find/replace. All of those are real costs.
All anyone cares about is the end package. Not the tools used to make it.
-
@Benjamin-Hall said in Google Cloud Platform and near-perfect documentation:
All anyone cares about is the end package. Not the tools used to make it.
More than you're describing. If the text file is mostly static, what's the complicated build process for? Just compile before deploying. Good enough > lots of effort, right?
-
@pie_flavor said in Google Cloud Platform and near-perfect documentation:
@Benjamin-Hall said in Google Cloud Platform and near-perfect documentation:
All anyone cares about is the end package. Not the tools used to make it.
More than you're describing. If the text file is mostly static, what's the complicated build process for? The
.wasm
file is static too. Good enough > lots of effort, right?But all the per-assignment config has to be part of that file because where it's served from has no (non system) filesystem access. I can serve static files but I can't open one programmatically. So that's all in the JS file. Means 2 lines change every time. Doing that now is as simple as cat ing them together on output. Your way would require a complete recompile every time.
And again, there's no benefit from doing it your way. Shaving milliseconds when UI and network latency is in the hundreds of milliseconds (users are slow) is pointless.
-
@pie_flavor said in Google Cloud Platform and near-perfect documentation:
@boomzilla said in Google Cloud Platform and near-perfect documentation:
@dkf said in Google Cloud Platform and near-perfect documentation:
@pie_flavor said in Google Cloud Platform and near-perfect documentation:
I'm talking about ideal software solutions.
Ideals schmideals. Real code isn't ideal, but it delivers real value to real people.
In any case faffing about with pointers can't possibly be included in any ideal software solution.
out
andref
in C# would like a word with you.Why?
-
@Benjamin-Hall said in Google Cloud Platform and near-perfect documentation:
Oh, and performance? The performance of this code was dominated by user input time. Like orders and orders of magnitude. At worst it ran for < 250 ms/assignment. Total. Over many pages. Often the lag in browser update time (on an old iPad) was longer than the runtime of this code.
Dude. Just open slack 10 times in parallel. Then you'll know about performance.
-
@ben_lubar said in Google Cloud Platform and near-perfect documentation:
@boomzilla said in Google Cloud Platform and near-perfect documentation:
@pie_flavor said in Google Cloud Platform and near-perfect documentation:
@boomzilla said in Google Cloud Platform and near-perfect documentation:
@pie_flavor said in Google Cloud Platform and near-perfect documentation:
@boomzilla said in Google Cloud Platform and near-perfect documentation:
There are a lot of reasons to like js over rust for certain applications.
I declare that there is not one single application where JS would do better than Rust.
No one gives a shit.
And yet you're still responding to me.
Oh, I mean that no one cares that you have a ridiculous opinion about your favorite programming language. It's still fun to respond to you.
If only there were someone @pie_flavor could have learned this fact from by observation...
You mean Swampy and his VB addiction? I think you can simply mention him, no need to talk in riddles.
-
@boomzilla said in Google Cloud Platform and near-perfect documentation:
@pie_flavor said in Google Cloud Platform and near-perfect documentation:
@boomzilla said in Google Cloud Platform and near-perfect documentation:
@dkf said in Google Cloud Platform and near-perfect documentation:
@pie_flavor said in Google Cloud Platform and near-perfect documentation:
I'm talking about ideal software solutions.
Ideals schmideals. Real code isn't ideal, but it delivers real value to real people.
In any case faffing about with pointers can't possibly be included in any ideal software solution.
out
andref
in C# would like a word with you.Why?
Because they're pointers, and damn good at it.
-
@pie_flavor said in Google Cloud Platform and near-perfect documentation:
@boomzilla said in Google Cloud Platform and near-perfect documentation:
@pie_flavor said in Google Cloud Platform and near-perfect documentation:
@boomzilla said in Google Cloud Platform and near-perfect documentation:
@dkf said in Google Cloud Platform and near-perfect documentation:
@pie_flavor said in Google Cloud Platform and near-perfect documentation:
I'm talking about ideal software solutions.
Ideals schmideals. Real code isn't ideal, but it delivers real value to real people.
In any case faffing about with pointers can't possibly be included in any ideal software solution.
out
andref
in C# would like a word with you.Why?
Because they're pointers, and damn good at it.
You really have an unfortunate aversion to points.
-
@boomzilla said in Google Cloud Platform and near-perfect documentation:
@pie_flavor said in Google Cloud Platform and near-perfect documentation:
@boomzilla said in Google Cloud Platform and near-perfect documentation:
@pie_flavor said in Google Cloud Platform and near-perfect documentation:
@boomzilla said in Google Cloud Platform and near-perfect documentation:
@dkf said in Google Cloud Platform and near-perfect documentation:
@pie_flavor said in Google Cloud Platform and near-perfect documentation:
I'm talking about ideal software solutions.
Ideals schmideals. Real code isn't ideal, but it delivers real value to real people.
In any case faffing about with pointers can't possibly be included in any ideal software solution.
out
andref
in C# would like a word with you.Why?
Because they're pointers, and damn good at it.
You really have an unfortunate aversion to points.
No, just to you being obtuse.
-
@pie_flavor said in Google Cloud Platform and near-perfect documentation:
@boomzilla said in Google Cloud Platform and near-perfect documentation:
@pie_flavor said in Google Cloud Platform and near-perfect documentation:
@boomzilla said in Google Cloud Platform and near-perfect documentation:
@pie_flavor said in Google Cloud Platform and near-perfect documentation:
@boomzilla said in Google Cloud Platform and near-perfect documentation:
@dkf said in Google Cloud Platform and near-perfect documentation:
@pie_flavor said in Google Cloud Platform and near-perfect documentation:
I'm talking about ideal software solutions.
Ideals schmideals. Real code isn't ideal, but it delivers real value to real people.
In any case faffing about with pointers can't possibly be included in any ideal software solution.
out
andref
in C# would like a word with you.Why?
Because they're pointers, and damn good at it.
You really have an unfortunate aversion to points.
No, just to you being obtuse.
Which I wasn't, but you can't tell the difference between having to dereference pointers and all that bullshit with having a parameter that's really a return value because you're overly focused on irrelevant implementation details.
-
@boomzilla said in Google Cloud Platform and near-perfect documentation:
@pie_flavor said in Google Cloud Platform and near-perfect documentation:
@boomzilla said in Google Cloud Platform and near-perfect documentation:
@pie_flavor said in Google Cloud Platform and near-perfect documentation:
@boomzilla said in Google Cloud Platform and near-perfect documentation:
@pie_flavor said in Google Cloud Platform and near-perfect documentation:
@boomzilla said in Google Cloud Platform and near-perfect documentation:
@dkf said in Google Cloud Platform and near-perfect documentation:
@pie_flavor said in Google Cloud Platform and near-perfect documentation:
I'm talking about ideal software solutions.
Ideals schmideals. Real code isn't ideal, but it delivers real value to real people.
In any case faffing about with pointers can't possibly be included in any ideal software solution.
out
andref
in C# would like a word with you.Why?
Because they're pointers, and damn good at it.
You really have an unfortunate aversion to points.
No, just to you being obtuse.
Which I wasn't, but you can't tell the difference between having to dereference pointers and all that bullshit with having a parameter that's really a return value because you're overly focused on irrelevant implementation details.
That's
out
; you forgot aboutref
.
-
@pie_flavor said in Google Cloud Platform and near-perfect documentation:
That's
out
; you forgot aboutref
Dre
.FTFY, Motherfucker.
-
@pie_flavor said in Google Cloud Platform and near-perfect documentation:
@boomzilla said in Google Cloud Platform and near-perfect documentation:
@pie_flavor said in Google Cloud Platform and near-perfect documentation:
@boomzilla said in Google Cloud Platform and near-perfect documentation:
@pie_flavor said in Google Cloud Platform and near-perfect documentation:
@boomzilla said in Google Cloud Platform and near-perfect documentation:
@pie_flavor said in Google Cloud Platform and near-perfect documentation:
@boomzilla said in Google Cloud Platform and near-perfect documentation:
@dkf said in Google Cloud Platform and near-perfect documentation:
@pie_flavor said in Google Cloud Platform and near-perfect documentation:
I'm talking about ideal software solutions.
Ideals schmideals. Real code isn't ideal, but it delivers real value to real people.
In any case faffing about with pointers can't possibly be included in any ideal software solution.
out
andref
in C# would like a word with you.Why?
Because they're pointers, and damn good at it.
You really have an unfortunate aversion to points.
No, just to you being obtuse.
Which I wasn't, but you can't tell the difference between having to dereference pointers and all that bullshit with having a parameter that's really a return value because you're overly focused on irrelevant implementation details.
That's
out
; you forgot aboutref
.That's what you think. What about
ref
?
-
@boomzilla said in Google Cloud Platform and near-perfect documentation:
@pie_flavor said in Google Cloud Platform and near-perfect documentation:
@boomzilla said in Google Cloud Platform and near-perfect documentation:
@pie_flavor said in Google Cloud Platform and near-perfect documentation:
@boomzilla said in Google Cloud Platform and near-perfect documentation:
@pie_flavor said in Google Cloud Platform and near-perfect documentation:
@boomzilla said in Google Cloud Platform and near-perfect documentation:
@pie_flavor said in Google Cloud Platform and near-perfect documentation:
@boomzilla said in Google Cloud Platform and near-perfect documentation:
@dkf said in Google Cloud Platform and near-perfect documentation:
@pie_flavor said in Google Cloud Platform and near-perfect documentation:
I'm talking about ideal software solutions.
Ideals schmideals. Real code isn't ideal, but it delivers real value to real people.
In any case faffing about with pointers can't possibly be included in any ideal software solution.
out
andref
in C# would like a word with you.Why?
Because they're pointers, and damn good at it.
You really have an unfortunate aversion to points.
No, just to you being obtuse.
Which I wasn't, but you can't tell the difference between having to dereference pointers and all that bullshit with having a parameter that's really a return value because you're overly focused on irrelevant implementation details.
That's
out
; you forgot aboutref
.That's what you think. What about
ref
?It's also a pointer.
-
@pie_flavor said in Google Cloud Platform and near-perfect documentation:
@boomzilla said in Google Cloud Platform and near-perfect documentation:
@pie_flavor said in Google Cloud Platform and near-perfect documentation:
@boomzilla said in Google Cloud Platform and near-perfect documentation:
@pie_flavor said in Google Cloud Platform and near-perfect documentation:
@boomzilla said in Google Cloud Platform and near-perfect documentation:
@pie_flavor said in Google Cloud Platform and near-perfect documentation:
@boomzilla said in Google Cloud Platform and near-perfect documentation:
@pie_flavor said in Google Cloud Platform and near-perfect documentation:
@boomzilla said in Google Cloud Platform and near-perfect documentation:
@dkf said in Google Cloud Platform and near-perfect documentation:
@pie_flavor said in Google Cloud Platform and near-perfect documentation:
I'm talking about ideal software solutions.
Ideals schmideals. Real code isn't ideal, but it delivers real value to real people.
In any case faffing about with pointers can't possibly be included in any ideal software solution.
out
andref
in C# would like a word with you.Why?
Because they're pointers, and damn good at it.
You really have an unfortunate aversion to points.
No, just to you being obtuse.
Which I wasn't, but you can't tell the difference between having to dereference pointers and all that bullshit with having a parameter that's really a return value because you're overly focused on irrelevant implementation details.
That's
out
; you forgot aboutref
.That's what you think. What about
ref
?It's also a pointer.
And?
-
@loopback0 said in Google Cloud Platform and near-perfect documentation:
@pie_flavor said in Google Cloud Platform and near-perfect documentation:
That's
out
; you forgot aboutref
Dre
.FTFY,
Motherfucker.BITCHCOMPLAIN!FTFTFYFY
-
@pie_flavor said in Google Cloud Platform and near-perfect documentation:
It's also a pointer.
Doesn't look like one?
-
@boomzilla Are you not capable of following your own thread of conversation? Sad.
-
@pie_flavor said in Google Cloud Platform and near-perfect documentation:
Are you not capable of following your own thread of conversation? Sad.
Everyone knows that threads are hard in computer science.