Back to the channels

#nevet

1. 00:04 jreicher It's funny isn't it. :)
2. 00:05 jreicher But to go back to your example, why would "fo"+"o" give a different result from "fo"+o? I'm missing something?
3. 00:11 blue jreicher: because of how test is implemented: return a == b;
4. 00:14 jreicher I'm still not following. Why would "fo"+"o" return true for that? Have you tried it?
5. 00:14 jreicher (I can think of a reason why it might, but I don't think we can assume it)
6. 00:15 blue jreicher: https://www.programiz.com/online-compiler/4fAcB0YXIyK2I
7. 00:15 nevet See my Java code in action
8. 00:20 blue as you can see, this proves that the origin story of a string matters (unfortunately)
9. 00:20 dreamreal jreicher: you nailed it - blue is wanting string to be a primitive, and it's not, nor should it be
10. 00:21 blue this isn't something an implementer can reasonably track, so he will always use .equals, anyway
11. 00:21 dreamreal unless we want to see StringUtils.equalsIgnoreCase(foo) etc
12. 00:21 blue dreamreal: that's not a good example; if you want to compare two strings irregardless of case, convert them both to the same case. pretty straight in JS
13. 00:22 dreamreal and comparisons, too
14. 00:22 dreamreal all those string operations that fall out of natural applications of a string being an object, broken
15. 00:22 blue "a".toLowerCase()==="A".toLowerCase()
16. 00:22 blue those string operations are stupid!
17. 00:22 dreamreal a whole class of exceptional cases just because you want == to apply as it does in other languages that fit a certain classification
18. 00:23 dreamreal yeah, argument's over, you just lost it voluntarily, mate
19. 00:23 dreamreal "those string operations are stupid" is a rotten argument that a debate judge would toss
20. 00:23 blue what exception cases? a.equalsIgnoreCase(b) is just as broken; and equals doesn't justify it
21. 00:23 jreicher https://www.programiz.com/online-compiler/2fAcBchE8y3wI
22. 00:23 nevet See my Java code in action
23. 00:23 jreicher blue: ^
24. 00:23 blue easier: a.toLower()==b.toLower()
25. 00:24 jreicher Sorry I couldn't think of anything simpler
26. 00:24 blue almost just as long, most expressive, and WORKS!
27. 00:24 jreicher I hope you see the point I'm trying to make with that code
28. 00:24 dreamreal you should write a very very VERY sternly worded email to brian, mark, and james
29. 00:24 dreamreal you will have done what you can, and every other java programmer will shrug and move on
30. 00:25 blue jreicher: yes; you've made it for the jvm impossible to intern that value
31. 00:25 dreamreal jreicher: don't bother, I've already mentioned the interning
32. 00:25 dreamreal he doesn't care, he's desperate for ==
33. 00:25 blue that makes the criticism all the better: should we really program against implementation details of the jvm? when we think it interns something, when we think it doesn't?
34. 00:26 dreamreal wants it to be impossible to derive identity reference equality for strings, or MAYBE just have a special case where you call the identity reference accessor for that case and that case only
35. 00:26 jreicher blue: I don't think it's about interning. It's about what the compiler can do statically. It was actually performing the concatenation for you.
36. 00:26 blue dreamreal has lost the battle so he's resorting to mudtossing, which is ok; the grown-ups here understand my criticism is valid, and more so, correct
37. 00:26 dreamreal we don't think it interns JACK SHIT, that's why you use equals()
38. 00:26 dreamreal no, we've been telling you the same thing for days now
39. 00:26 dreamreal there's no mud here
40. 00:26 bot [jottinger/bytecode.news] New PR #109: Unify docs - https://github.com/jottinger/bytecode.news/pull/109
41. 00:27 dreamreal with equals(), the derivation is predictable
42. 00:27 blue your only reaction so far was to declare anyone who doubts this, or stumbles upon this, a bad java programmer; you prefer telling people it's THEIR issue instead of acknowledge the language is broken in that
43. 00:27 dreamreal objects act like objects, all the way up and down the tree: valhalla will make a class of objects act like primitives
44. 00:27 jreicher blue: it's not completely relevant, but when I was an undergrad learning about functional programming I asked the lecturer why the compiler couldn't do more evaluation since there are no side effects. He responded "well most people expect the compiler to terminate..."
45. 00:27 dreamreal no, I said they were a newbie java coder who projected other language characteristics on java
46. 00:28 dreamreal there's a reason few java coders with more than a week of experience get caught by this
47. 00:28 blue dreamreal: if this is one of the things most people stumble upon learning java, then it is a VALID concern
48. 00:28 dreamreal it's a burr that gets sanded down really really quickly because EVERY object acts the same, EXCEPT for string concat
49. 00:28 dreamreal yeah, I've seen that too
50. 00:28 * dreamreal sighs
51. 00:28 dreamreal this is why java failed after six months of its initial deployment
52. 00:28 blue jreicher: ha, I see!
53. 00:28 dreamreal programmers couldn't figure it out
54. 00:29 dreamreal they was just too stupid
55. 00:29 blue dreamreal: if you got your head out of the sand, you'd realise that in very many circles, java is a red flag
56. 00:30 blue I wouldn't call it a successful language at all
57. 00:30 jreicher I don't know. Such widespread hate might be a sign of widespread use. ;)
58. 00:30 blue it's got some things right -- particularly recently, but it's been a dumpster fire for nearly forever
59. 00:30 nevet it's got some things right now has karma of -1.
60. 00:30 dreamreal I'm well aware of it, and yet for SOME reason... OMG have you seen my bill rate
61. 00:30 dreamreal it's weird
62. 00:31 * dreamreal is not rich, but lives in a nice house, has insurance, has a stable job, has a predictable employment cycle
63. 00:31 blue here we go, the argument from authority here. *I* do java and *I* earn money with it so it must be amazing!
64. 00:31 dreamreal it's failed almost as badly as cobol has
65. 00:31 dreamreal tf are you talking about?
66. 00:31 dreamreal You made a claim that it's failed because of *reputation* in some circles
67. 00:31 dreamreal the counter to that is that its reputation is FINE in other circles
68. 00:32 dreamreal that's not arguing from authority, that's contrasting evidence
69. 00:32 dreamreal how the hell do you talk in shul
70. 00:32 blue java has a *terrible* reputation. Maybe you've mostly been in java circles historically, but in other circles -- it's almost considered a joke
71. 00:32 nevet java has a *terrible* reputation. Maybe you've mostly been in java circles historically, but in other circles now has karma of -1.
72. 00:32 dreamreal I'm well aware of its reputation in other circles. So what?
73. 00:33 blue There's a reason for that
74. 00:33 dreamreal Perl is the worst! ... meanwhile perl is doing fine. COBOL is AWFUL! ... meanwhile trillions of dollars file endlessly through cobol programs. Popularity especially among the glitterati is not a measure of success.
75. 00:33 blue Part of it is that it's often so very dumb to do basic things, and the language expects you to do something else instead
76. 00:33 dreamreal then don't use it! Easy peasy.
77. 00:34 dreamreal nobody here gets a puppy if you like java... or loses one if you don't.
78. 00:34 blue That's.. not an answer. *sigh*
79. 00:34 dreamreal It actually kinda is: you're arguing with a fencepost expecting to win.
80. 00:34 dreamreal I mean, nobody here is going to argue that java has no warts. If it had none, there'd be no reason for java 26, yeah?
81. 00:34 blue So I can't criticise Java, and if I do, I am either a "bad Java programmer" / "noob", or I should just not use it? That's your retort? Can you use better than a 5-year-old?
82. 00:35 blue s/use/do/
83. 00:35 dreamreal but the warts it has are survivable and if == is THE WORST FLAW the language has, I'll take it. If you won't, well, that's cool bruh
84. 00:35 Chronos blue: The old C programmer in me is *horrified* at the idea of creating new strings in lowercase just to compare them. So much wasted performance and memory! :(
85. 00:35 jreicher blue: it depends on the basis for the criticism. I'm very much against the idea of a general purpose language. I don't think it's possible.
86. 00:35 dreamreal Pick a criticsm that has more merit
87. 00:35 blue it's not the worst, it's *one* of the worst!
88. 00:35 dreamreal hell, I'm upset that they're getting rid of the security manager
89. 00:35 jreicher So for me the only valid criticism is that Java isn't doing something well AND it's intended for that thing
90. 00:36 blue Chronos: ha!
91. 00:36 dreamreal Chronos: blue may also be unaware of java's algol heritage :D
92. 00:36 dreamreal I dunno
93. 00:38 blue "One of the biggest complaints is how much code you have to write for simple things."
94. 00:38 dreamreal the other side of ALL of this is that even if EVERY PERSON in this channel were to agree on every facet that Java has flaws X, Y, Z, A, B, and C, ESPECIALLY that dumb ol' string comparison thing, it doesn't make a single bit of difference to the wider java ecosystem, at all: the person who has THE MOST access here is dmlloyd
95. 00:38 blue equals(), hashCode(), toString()
96. 00:38 blue but YEAH, I AM the ONLY one who has a problem with equals!
97. 00:38 jreicher blue: yes, I would never use Java for throwaway or PoC code
98. 00:38 dreamreal blue: who says that, please?
99. 00:38 blue dreamreal: CHAPPI
100. 00:39 dreamreal Who's that?
101. 00:39 blue chatgpt
102. 00:39 dreamreal let me know when you're thinking for yourself and not echoing a bayesian complaint
103. 00:39 blue so you're claiming it's wrong?
104. 00:39 blue that it's NOT one of the biggest complaints?
105. 00:39 blue because that reflects what I've seen in the last 20 years
106. 00:39 dreamreal hell, surial wrote a library to get rid of a lot of that, a very popular one, and java itself mitigated much of it as well with records
107. 00:40 dreamreal I'm not claiming it's wrong that many people complaing about it, but using it is like saying "well the protocols say that..."
108. 00:40 blue literally the FIRST thing chatpgt writes is VERBOSITY ("Too much boilerplate")
109. 00:40 dreamreal Yes, it's quite verbose
110. 00:40 blue and mentions `equals` as one of the first things
111. 00:40 * dreamreal sighs
112. 00:41 jreicher you know chatgpt is just an automated regurgitation of popular complaints from humans...
113. 00:41 blue YUP!
114. 00:41 blue which confirms what I'm saying
115. 00:41 blue next, gemini
116. 00:41 jreicher That these are POPULAR complainst, yes.
117. 00:42 blue 1. The "Boilerplate" Tax
118. 00:42 dreamreal Okay, just to make you happy: OMG you're right, I've never before seen anyone complain about verbosity in a language famous for not making presumptions, it's the worst, how could i have lived this long this way, I knew Java was never going to work, I have no idea how I got nevet running
119. 00:42 blue Java is notoriously wordy. Even for simple tasks, you often have to write a significant amount of "ceremonial" code.
120. 00:42 dreamreal blue: that information's out of date, BTW
121. 00:42 blue Verbosity: Before Java 14’s Records, creating a simple data carrier required manually writing getters, setters, equals(), hashCode(), and toString().
122. 00:42 dreamreal records, no more class declarations
123. 00:42 dreamreal yes, before java 14's records, it's almost like java still grows and changes
124. 00:43 jreicher blue: generics are an early example of Java developing to get rid of boilerplate. That always happened, and is still happening.
125. 00:43 dreamreal it's like you're demanding change but no not THAT change, I demand MY change because I can'r wrap my head around == meaning reference equality
126. 00:43 dreamreal blue: we are not the right audience for this
127. 00:44 blue dude, java 14 previewed records and it came out officially in java 16 (2021). that's FAIRLY new, so before you also thought the language was garbage?
128. 00:44 dreamreal No, I was surprisingly able to deploy things well with java 1.02
129. 00:44 blue then what are you talking about
130. 00:44 dreamreal because I don't see the language as a replacement for the programmer
131. 00:44 blue you're just a blind fanboy at this stage
132. 00:44 blue I am able to use things like JS whilst fully criticising their issues
133. 00:44 jreicher blue: nobody is saying Java is perfect!
134. 00:44 dreamreal it's verbose? Oh no, it's like I, as a programmer, have to write code to get something done, guess I'll write code
135. 00:45 dreamreal because java suited my needs at the time
136. 00:45 dreamreal and still does
137. 00:45 blue yes, verbosity is bad, repeating yourself like an idiot is bad and error-prone
138. 00:45 jreicher Just because this or that criticism is invalid doesn't not mean there do not exist any valid criticisms
139. 00:45 dreamreal we criticize java too, blue
140. 00:45 Chronos If anyone thinks Java strings are bad for any reason, have a seat and let grandpa tell you about C strings
141. 00:45 dreamreal or let's start talking about dates
142. 00:45 blue dreamreal: I've NEVER heard or seen you criticise java, and everytime I do, your hairs stand on end!
143. 00:46 dreamreal blue: and?
144. 00:46 blue that sounds like involuntary reaction instead of actually interning the criticism and agreeing where agreement is due
145. 00:46 dreamreal you criticize things for reasons I find insufficiently severe to be obstructed by
146. 00:46 jreicher Well my pet hate at the moment is the lack of a bottom type. I'm really annoyed about that.
147. 00:46 jreicher Keep meaning to submit a JEP
148. 00:46 dreamreal so wait - what you're saying is you're desperate for people to agree with you?
149. 00:46 blue that's ok, then just say, criticism is valid, I just don't care
150. 00:47 dreamreal jreicher: what's a bottom type?
151. 00:47 blue but if you don't care about ANYTHING, and everything is "so what?", then what are you doing discussing stuff with people to begin with?
152. 00:47 jreicher A subtype of all other types. Always the bottom of the type hierarchy.
153. 00:47 blue he means an 'any'
154. 00:47 dreamreal blue: maybe this will satisfy you: you're right in all ways here, I tend to focus on different things than changing the underlying structure to fit what I need if I can use that structure to get stuff done
155. 00:48 blue dreamreal: THANK YOU, now we're finally getting SOMEWHERE
156. 00:48 dreamreal hmm, how would that be fundamentally different than a top type?
157. 00:48 jreicher An Object parameter will accept anything. A bottom value can be submitted to anything.
158. 00:49 jreicher lvalue vs rvalue. That kind of thing.
159. 00:49 jreicher Or whatever that generics mnemonic is
160. 00:49 dreamreal hmmm
161. 00:49 jreicher (That Kotlin built in to the language)
162. 00:49 blue dreamreal: in TS, there are three types: `any`, `never` and `unknown`
163. 00:49 blue any is stupid because it's both top and bottom. it's basically a copout
164. 00:50 blue unknown is a top type
165. 00:50 blue never is a bottom type
166. 00:50 blue never is assignable to anything
167. 00:50 blue unknown is assisnable to nothing
168. 00:51 jreicher What's frustrating is that I can't see a reason for Null not to be treated this way. It already exists in the language.
169. 00:51 blue or rather, anything is assigned to unknown
170. 00:51 jreicher And it's the type counterpart of the fact that null is a value that can be assigned to any reference type variable.
171. 00:52 blue let x: unknown; x = 42; x = "foo"; x = null;
172. 00:52 blue but: let: x unknown; x.toString(); // error
173. 00:53 blue must narrow first: if (typeof x === "string") x.toUpperCase();
174. 00:54 blue function fail(): never { throw "a"; }
175. 00:54 blue const x: string = fail(); // no problem
176. 00:54 blue const y: number = fail(); // same
177. 00:55 blue let z: never = "foo"; // error, can't assign anything to bottom type
178. 00:57 jreicher Attempting to implement a generic Either type is what made me want this.
179. 00:58 jreicher From what I can tell it's not just the right way to do it, but perhaps the only way
180. 06:33 * NeXeN joined #nevet
181. 07:33 * jreicher joined #nevet
182. 07:38 * jreicher joined #nevet
183. 09:59 * NeXeN joined #nevet
184. 11:08 * jreicher joined #nevet
185. 12:44 * nevet` joined #nevet
186. 13:05 * nevet` joined #nevet
187. 13:08 * nevet` joined #nevet
188. 13:36 * nevet` joined #nevet
189. 13:38 * nevet` joined #nevet
190. 13:49 * dreamreal sighs. breaking stuff is fun!
191. 14:02 * nevet` joined #nevet
192. 14:03 dreamreal okay, nevet`'s autoconnect to irc is off, that'll stop :D
193. 14:10 Chronos Of possible interest: https://poc.bcachefs.org/
194. 14:10 nevet ProofOfConcept
195. 14:12 dreamreal Chronos: I'm building a "reference UI" for nevet, closing some gaps in the UI services - and getting OTP working. :D
196. 14:12 Chronos dreamreal: Woo hoo! \o/
197. 14:14 dreamreal it looks like absolute ass
198. 14:14 dreamreal but that doesn't matter. I'm able to post content (including anonymously for posts), approve the content, edit it, add comments..
199. 14:21 dreamreal What I really want is a *team*, where someone else owns the endpoints and I just make 'em work. But that's not likely for now. :)
200. 14:21 dreamreal so I'm basically trying to make it all out of whole cloth.
201. 14:55 blue dreamreal: currently you have one clown who uses claude for that, and another clown with a penchant for *fixing reality* before
202. 14:55 blue it's always the next release :P
203. 14:56 blue but I guess that's good: it's showing me where the software is missing features that are GENERALLY needed
204. 14:57 blue anyway I've been busy with my slavework. once I have some time, maybe this weekend, I could possibly try to fast-cut the next primate release and work on the ui
205. 14:57 dreamreal no worries and no hurry
206. 14:57 dreamreal and seriously, the judgement helps nothing
207. 14:57 dreamreal we all have real jobs
208. 14:58 blue it's neither: I *want* to do it, but I'm also not happy with the missing puzzle pieces that would allow me to talk to nevet's API properly
209. 14:58 dreamreal I just created a new PR, with a working reference UI
210. 14:59 blue the openapi code generator has been planned for a while, it's just gained more prominence by an actual use case now
211. 15:00 dreamreal the reference UI looks ... interesting, as in "oh, really."
212. 15:00 blue dreamreal: why not a wildcard subdomain cert?
213. 15:00 blue anyway, looking at the ref impl
214. 15:00 dreamreal blue: because that requires, as best I can tell, a CDN
215. 15:01 blue it does not. I got a wildcard subdomain configured on RP and I don't have a CDN
216. 15:01 dreamreal then maybe that's the way to go - the DNS host stuff recently would also take care of it
217. 15:01 dreamreal This is all definitely not in my wheelhouse
218. 15:02 blue oh goodness
219. 15:03 dreamreal I told you!
220. 15:03 blue this is...
221. 15:03 blue I'm without words
222. 15:03 dreamreal "ass"
223. 15:03 dreamreal "awful"
224. 15:03 dreamreal "... really?"
225. 15:03 dreamreal "This actually works?"
226. 15:04 dreamreal "this looks like you threw it together in an hour without knowing what you're doing"?
227. 15:04 blue `<link rel="stylesheet" href="/node_modules/@picocss/pico/css/pico.min.css" />`
228. 15:04 * blue totally loses it
229. 15:04 blue yes, ok, yes
230. 15:04 dreamreal hey, this is for *development*
231. 15:05 dreamreal the thing is, this actually exposed some backend problems that got fixed as a result, which was the whole point
232. 15:06 * blue quotes les christians
233. 15:06 blue "and forgive us our trespasses, as we forgive those who trespass against us"
234. 15:06 blue well, could be worse
235. 15:10 dreamreal the only thing that bugs me is the impression that you've been offended in some way :D
236. 15:13 blue offended?
237. 15:13 blue I'm NEVER offended!
238. 15:20 dreamreal I miss the good old days when http was enough, and https was an affectation
239. 15:20 dreamreal "oh look at YOU you're all SECURE like people can't be TRUSTED"
240. 15:21 dreamreal meanwhile: people can definitely not be trusted and even https isn't secure, people are awful
241. 15:23 Chronos dreamreal: People are why we can't have nice things
242. 15:23 dreamreal right?
243. 15:27 bot [jottinger/bytecode.news] New PR #110: Adding a locally-working reference UI - https://github.com/jottinger/bytecode.news/pull/110
244. 20:27 bot [jottinger/bytecode.news] New issue #111: Improve karma parsing to reduce false positives - https://github.com/jottinger/bytecode.news/issues/111
245. 20:42 blue ^ nice!
246. 20:48 Chronos Maybe implement a `!karma` command? Then no worries about --, ++, etc.
247. 20:48 nevet Maybe implement a `!karma` command? Then no worries about -- now has karma of 1.
248. 20:49 Chronos And whoops.
249. 20:49 Chronos Karma karma karma karma karma chameleon
250. 20:54 bot [jottinger/bytecode.news] New PR #112: Updating karma parsing for some common circumstances - https://github.com/jottinger/bytecode.news/pull/112
251. 20:54 * nevet joined #nevet
252. 20:54 * dreamreal!~dreamreal@about/java/dreamreal changed the topic to: This is the channel for the development of the software that runs nevet: https://github.com/jottinger/streampack
253. 20:54 dreamreal karma is not supposed to require a lot of interaction to record
254. 20:55 dreamreal The rules for parsing should be better now
255. 20:55 dreamreal I really dislike C++
256. 20:55 nevet I really dislike C now has karma of 1.
257. 20:55 dreamreal ... or not :D
258. 20:55 dreamreal dang it, okay, that's fine, we can track that
259. 20:58 * dreamreal!~dreamreal@about/java/dreamreal changed the topic to: This is the channel for the development of the software that runs nevet: https://github.com/jottinger/streampack
260. 20:58 * nevet joined #nevet
261. 20:58 dreamreal There we go!
262. 20:58 dreamreal I really dislike C++
263. 20:58 dreamreal or not
264. 20:59 dreamreal now let's try it
265. 20:59 dreamreal Chronos: ++
266. 20:59 nevet Chronos now has karma of 3.
267. 20:59 dreamreal I really dislike C++
268. 20:59 dreamreal Yep, there we go.
269. 20:59 dreamreal This fix required wizardry: "git checkout main"
270. 20:59 * dreamreal sighs
271. 20:59 dreamreal Okay, I'm off for the day.
272. 21:26 * Chronos joined #nevet
273. 21:26 * PyR3X joined #nevet
274. 21:27 * NeXeN joined #nevet