Re: OT: Flash and Javascript (Was: Taunting)
Nick Sabalausky wrote: Alexander P�nek alexander.pa...@brainsware.org wrote in message news:gvlrua$16p...@digitalmars.com... grauzone wrote: browsers. What's the big deal everyone have with Javascript? Look mah, JS and Flash combined in shiny modal windows: http://www.smashingmagazine.com/2009/05/27/modal-windows-in-modern-web-design/ No, I really don't want to torture you. Well, maybe a little. :P Oh my god, whoever wrote that should be arrested by internet police and locked away for a vry long time... No. You know, there are people having a different vision of “The Web” as you have, and just because of that you want them to be locked away? Seriously, why do some people have to be so stubborn? We have 2009. Not 1999, but 2009. It’s time for some advancement. The web isn’t only text some floating images inbetween anymore. There are quite a few crafts involved when building a website, including interface designers and programmers. As much as you’d give a rats ass about what the designer talks about programming you shouldn’t judge about the interface designer’s work. Since it’s his craft and not yours. And, please don’t take this personally, but programmers are usually really really bad [interface] designers. “Cobbler, stick to your last.” Don’t get me wrong, I’m a programmer, too. I’m not really that good at interface design either, but I at least try to accept new ways of doing things. That’s what I usually expect from other fellow programmers, but people never cease to amaze me (in the negative sense). Oh and btw: if you don’t use vim, you should be arrested by flamewar police and locked away for a vry long time... (See what I did there?) I am sincerely pissed. Not at you personally, but rather the cloud of ignorance gladly sharing its existense with me all the time.
Re: OT: Flash and Javascript (Was: Taunting)
Nick Sabalausky wrote: Alexander P�nek alexander.pa...@brainsware.org wrote in message news:gvm3qh$1ld...@digitalmars.com... grauzone wrote: Alexander P�nek wrote: grauzone wrote: Alexander P�nek wrote: Look mah, JS and Flash combined in shiny modal windows: http://www.smashingmagazine.com/2009/05/27/modal-windows-in-modern-web-design/ No, I really don't want to torture you. Well, maybe a little. :P Oh god... why... *snip* The modal window has many advantages. For example, when a modal window contains a smaller element, the user doesn't need to load an entirely new page just to access it (another way to achieve the same effect is e.g. by using AJAX-based tabs). By providing modal windows, you improve the usability of your website. Having to load pages over and over will annoy most users, so avoiding that is definitely a good thing. Modal windows also allow you to save space by getting rid of large elements that don't need to be on the main page. For example, rather than putting a full video on a page, you can just provide a link, thumbnail or button of some sort. Yeah, I read that. I want to smash him to pieces. Why? I don't get it. Why is there so much hate and anger about it in the air? Srsly, this whole topic is just completely overrated. It's just the internet. ffs man. Because they're like pop-up windows, except they actually manage to be worse. Unlike traditional pop-ups, which are already bad enough: - They're modal Modal windows are modal, yes. That is certainly true. - They aren't blocked by pop-up blocking software Because they are not pop-ups. They don’t open a seperate native window on your desktop or tab in your browser. They’re contained. No need to block that. - They sometimes include completely useless, interface-delaying animations. Your point being? Sometimes technologies are used for completely useless crap. True. Does that make every technology bad? I understand that all the modal windows used for displaying advertisement are annoying as hell, yes. But that doesn’t make modal windows as described in this article in any way bad. Have you actually read anything there? Have you looked at some of the examples?
Re: QtD 0.2 release announcement.
On Fri, May 29, 2009 at 12:44 AM, Eldar Insafutdinov e.insafutdi...@gmail.com wrote: Eldar Insadutdinov Wrote: Another release of QtD is out. This time, it's Linux-only because OPTLINK refuses to link the project with debug info on Windows (see bug http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=2436). If anybody wants QtD on Windows, please keep pushing Walter until he does something with OPTLINK (bury it). Voting for the bug may help, too. I would repeat once again the request, that was raised here numerous of times, Walter, please change object file format, for me the ones used by MSVC or MinGW would be just fine. In this release: * Lots of bugfixes * Switched to Qt 4.5 * ldc supported (for both X86 and X86-64) * All imports inside Qt are now public to avoid import hell * Implemented API dealing with containers * All classes from Gui, OpenGL, Xml, Svg, Network and Webkit packages are wrapped * Build system is now based on CMake to be crossplatform and more flexible * New signals and slots implementation (pretty limited but we are working on a better one, which will support queued connections, connections by name at runtime, etc). * Ported duic, the tool for generating code out of xml representation * Ported drcc, the resources compiler Thanks to everyone involved in the project. So apparently I made it working on Windows as well. The thing that solved the problem was to feed source files to the compiler in the different order. Is it a correct behaviour? The DMD frontend has quite a few order dependencies. It's not correct behaviour, but a result of how it does semantics.
Re: QtD 0.2 release announcement.
On Fri, 29 May 2009 13:54:58 +0400, Tomas Lindquist Olsen tomas.l.ol...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, May 29, 2009 at 12:44 AM, Eldar Insafutdinov e.insafutdi...@gmail.com wrote: Eldar Insadutdinov Wrote: Another release of QtD is out. This time, it's Linux-only because OPTLINK refuses to link the project with debug info on Windows (see bug http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=2436). If anybody wants QtD on Windows, please keep pushing Walter until he does something with OPTLINK (bury it). Voting for the bug may help, too. I would repeat once again the request, that was raised here numerous of times, Walter, please change object file format, for me the ones used by MSVC or MinGW would be just fine. In this release: * Lots of bugfixes * Switched to Qt 4.5 * ldc supported (for both X86 and X86-64) * All imports inside Qt are now public to avoid import hell * Implemented API dealing with containers * All classes from Gui, OpenGL, Xml, Svg, Network and Webkit packages are wrapped * Build system is now based on CMake to be crossplatform and more flexible * New signals and slots implementation (pretty limited but we are working on a better one, which will support queued connections, connections by name at runtime, etc). * Ported duic, the tool for generating code out of xml representation * Ported drcc, the resources compiler Thanks to everyone involved in the project. So apparently I made it working on Windows as well. The thing that solved the problem was to feed source files to the compiler in the different order. Is it a correct behaviour? The DMD frontend has quite a few order dependencies. It's not correct behaviour, but a result of how it does semantics. Is it fixable, or a new frontend is required?
Re: QtD 0.2 release announcement.
On Fri, May 29, 2009 at 11:57 AM, Denis Koroskin 2kor...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, 29 May 2009 13:54:58 +0400, Tomas Lindquist Olsen tomas.l.ol...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, May 29, 2009 at 12:44 AM, Eldar Insafutdinov e.insafutdi...@gmail.com wrote: Eldar Insadutdinov Wrote: Another release of QtD is out. This time, it's Linux-only because OPTLINK refuses to link the project with debug info on Windows (see bug http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=2436). If anybody wants QtD on Windows, please keep pushing Walter until he does something with OPTLINK (bury it). Voting for the bug may help, too. I would repeat once again the request, that was raised here numerous of times, Walter, please change object file format, for me the ones used by MSVC or MinGW would be just fine. In this release: * Lots of bugfixes * Switched to Qt 4.5 * ldc supported (for both X86 and X86-64) * All imports inside Qt are now public to avoid import hell * Implemented API dealing with containers * All classes from Gui, OpenGL, Xml, Svg, Network and Webkit packages are wrapped * Build system is now based on CMake to be crossplatform and more flexible * New signals and slots implementation (pretty limited but we are working on a better one, which will support queued connections, connections by name at runtime, etc). * Ported duic, the tool for generating code out of xml representation * Ported drcc, the resources compiler Thanks to everyone involved in the project. So apparently I made it working on Windows as well. The thing that solved the problem was to feed source files to the compiler in the different order. Is it a correct behaviour? The DMD frontend has quite a few order dependencies. It's not correct behaviour, but a result of how it does semantics. Is it fixable, or a new frontend is required? Of course it's fixable :) But how much work it is, that's the real question ...
Re: QtD 0.2 release announcement.
Tomas Lindquist Olsen Wrote: On Fri, May 29, 2009 at 12:44 AM, Eldar Insafutdinov e.insafutdi...@gmail.com wrote: Eldar Insadutdinov Wrote: Another release of QtD is out. This time, it's Linux-only because OPTLINK refuses to link the project with debug info on Windows (see bug http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=2436). If anybody wants QtD on Windows, please keep pushing Walter until he does something with OPTLINK (bury it). Voting for the bug may help, too. I would repeat once again the request, that was raised here numerous of times, Walter, please change object file format, for me the ones used by MSVC or MinGW would be just fine. In this release: * Lots of bugfixes * Switched to Qt 4.5 * ldc supported (for both X86 and X86-64) * All imports inside Qt are now public to avoid import hell * Implemented API dealing with containers * All classes from Gui, OpenGL, Xml, Svg, Network and Webkit packages are wrapped * Build system is now based on CMake to be crossplatform and more flexible * New signals and slots implementation (pretty limited but we are working on a better one, which will support queued connections, connections by name at runtime, etc). * Ported duic, the tool for generating code out of xml representation * Ported drcc, the resources compiler Thanks to everyone involved in the project. So apparently I made it working on Windows as well. The thing that solved the problem was to feed source files to the compiler in the different order. Is it a correct behaviour? The DMD frontend has quite a few order dependencies. It's not correct behaviour, but a result of how it does semantics. Why is it working on linux then? With both ldc and dmd?
Re: ldc 0.9.1 released
Op Thu, 28 May 2009 03:08:45 +0200 schreef Tomas Lindquist Olsen tomas.l.ol...@gmail.com: * put the code under version control, that could simplify pulling fixes into our tree. You could setup a seperate branch with the DMD source, extract source tarball, commit. Then merge the DMDFE branch into the LDC branches. I dont know how to do this in hg, but i guess its very similar to git. Or is it already done this way?
Re: ldc 0.9.1 released
Kagamin wrote: I found recently that properly designed C++ code can live happily without all that esoteric macro/template crap and can be pretty readable and understandable even using nasty antipatterns. This being achieved simply by using C++ subset that is supported on various platforms. Code that does the job instead of casting black magic. The problem is trying to get an entire team to code that way.
Re: QtD 0.2 release announcement.
On Fri, May 29, 2009 at 12:22 PM, Eldar Insafutdinov e.insafutdi...@gmail.com wrote: Tomas Lindquist Olsen Wrote: On Fri, May 29, 2009 at 12:44 AM, Eldar Insafutdinov e.insafutdi...@gmail.com wrote: Eldar Insadutdinov Wrote: Another release of QtD is out. This time, it's Linux-only because OPTLINK refuses to link the project with debug info on Windows (see bug http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=2436). If anybody wants QtD on Windows, please keep pushing Walter until he does something with OPTLINK (bury it). Voting for the bug may help, too. I would repeat once again the request, that was raised here numerous of times, Walter, please change object file format, for me the ones used by MSVC or MinGW would be just fine. In this release: * Lots of bugfixes * Switched to Qt 4.5 * ldc supported (for both X86 and X86-64) * All imports inside Qt are now public to avoid import hell * Implemented API dealing with containers * All classes from Gui, OpenGL, Xml, Svg, Network and Webkit packages are wrapped * Build system is now based on CMake to be crossplatform and more flexible * New signals and slots implementation (pretty limited but we are working on a better one, which will support queued connections, connections by name at runtime, etc). * Ported duic, the tool for generating code out of xml representation * Ported drcc, the resources compiler Thanks to everyone involved in the project. So apparently I made it working on Windows as well. The thing that solved the problem was to feed source files to the compiler in the different order. Is it a correct behaviour? The DMD frontend has quite a few order dependencies. It's not correct behaviour, but a result of how it does semantics. Why is it working on linux then? With both ldc and dmd? I can't answer that, it's entirely possible it's a whole other issue. However, it could be that a version block is pulling in some trouble code, that is otherwise skipped on other platforms than windows. In the end you should really construct a test case to get it fixed.
Re: ldc 0.9.1 released
Timo Gransch wrote: Christian Kamm schrieb: but I am using a debug runtime. Does inserting a breakpoint in your code and running to that work? Back on x86-64 again: (gdb) break main Breakpoint 1 at 0x409150 Since there's main and _Dmain and I don't know how the GDB patches interact with breakpoint setting, can you try to make a breakpoint on the first line of your D main function (i.e. b myfile.d:15) and run to that? I'm now also subscribed to D.debugger and saw your post there. Let's move the discussion.
Re: OT: Flash and Javascript (Was: Taunting)
Reply to Nick, [sniped rant about why the web sucks] I'll grant you most of that and I don't care about the rest. It's ironic that this should come up in the D community because it sounds a lot like C++ template are to the web like D template are to what the web should be. That is; the Web has taken what it has and abused it (because nothing better was available) to get something it wants with no pity for the sucker who has to use it.
Re: Taunting
Ary Borenszweig escribió:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rtYCFVPfx4M
Bah... I just realized debugging that kind of things might be really
hart to do. Imagine this:
---
char[] something() {
return x *= 3; x += 4;;
}
mixin(int bla(int x) { x *= 2; ~ something ~ return 4; });
void main() {
const something = bla(2);
}
---
Now I want to debug the invocation of bla: how the variable x is being
modified. But there's no such place in the source code for that
definition (well, there is, but it's split in pieces, and obviously
you'll get lost when debugging).
So I'm starting to think that the compile-time debugger should work on
the (formatted) compile-time view of the modules. So you'll end up
debugging code like this:
---
char[] something() {
return x *= 3; x += 4;;
}
int bla(int x) {
x *= 2;
x *= 3;
x += 4;
return x;
}
void main() {
const something = bla(2);
}
---
But that's way more hard to do than what I'm doing right now.
Finally, you might want to have both worlds together, like:
---
char[] someOtherFunc() {
return char[] x = \whatever\;;
}
char[] someFunc() {
mixin(someOtherFunc());
return x;
}
mixin(someFunc());
---
Now I want to debug someFunc(). But I also want to see that
someOtherFunc() is expanded well, so I can't just show the compile-time
view of the module, because doing this might have an error already (the
error I want to debug, for example!). (and also the compile-time view
dependens on the function I'm trying to debug)
Aaah... I give up.
(I came to this conclusion when trying to debug the scrappes:units project).
Re: OT: Flash and Javascript (Was: Taunting)
BCS a...@pathlink.com wrote in message news:78ccfa2d417fc8cbae8318d2e...@news.digitalmars.com... Reply to Nick, [sniped rant about why the web sucks] I'll grant you most of that and I don't care about the rest. Cool and Fair enough ;) It's ironic that this should come up in the D community because it sounds a lot like C++ template are to the web like D template are to what the web should be. That is; the Web has taken what it has and abused it (because nothing better was available) to get something it wants with no pity for the sucker who has to use it. That's a very good assesement. I hadn't really thought of it that way, but that's a very good observation.
