|
So, I have an Android CI-Docker problem where I'm trying to set up jenkins and create a pipeline... But I'm having some trouble configuring the Jenkins instance which is run on a Docker container.
I'm not posting it here for a solution, I just need to know which is the right place on CP for this sort of question  . I'm not even sure if this is the right place to ask this question but I'm now kinda desperate (Stuck in the same problem for 4 days now).
|
|
|
|
|
I don't think you will get much response on CodeProject, maybe you can try on a Jenkins forum.
CodeProject mostly is about Microsoft technology.
Maybe you can find an alternative for Jenkins here: continuous-integration-tools-for-mobile-app-developers[^]
modified 24-Nov-19 16:00pm.
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks for the link I'll look into it... For now I think I'm gonna stick with Jenkins at least until I figure it out.
|
|
|
|
|
I would have started at the Android forum, as there are no obvious forums for neither Docker nor Jenkins.
|
|
|
|
|
That was my first thought but when I opened the Q&A section, I saw the questions were trivial... And I haven't had a good experience asking a bit difficult question. Check out
this question I asked about 5 months ago, still un-answered.
|
|
|
|
|
Like I said before I need the extra work to occupy me.
I've finally hit a wall with my Context Free Grammar class
It started out here, as tutorial code How to Make an LL(1) Parser: Lesson 1[^]
But it served me pretty well, and handled being extended fairly smoothly throughout its lifespan.
That's sometimes a sign of good architecture, and in this case, some luck.
But well, I need something far more complicated than this. Basically I want a full DOM with multiple ways to traverse it kind of like Microsoft's ActiveX Office objects.
And it has to cache.
Plus grammars are weird. The symbols are essentially strings, but those strings signify meaningful stuff pretty much only by their relationship to other symbols (strings).
Exposing an object model for that is something currently beyond me. There's too many circular possibilities. Changing the grammar in one place changes the characteristics of other parts of the grammar, like pushing a bubble around a waterbed.
I'm currently stumped.
When I was growin' up, I was the smartest kid I knew. Maybe that was just because I didn't know that many kids. All I know is now I feel the opposite.
|
|
|
|
|
It seems you have an interest in the basics of parsers/compilers. There are of course hundreds of books written on the subject (if not thousands). Some of them hard, others simple to understand.
Maybe the book the link is to gives a very gentle introduction in its chapter 3 to parsing, lots of practical stuff, minimum of theory that might be helpful for you further developing your SLR and LL software. Reading it shall convince you that the "theory" behind SLR and LALR is
slightly different, but both are elegant.
Of course one may wonder why not address full LR (1), since - other than on a 64K PDP-11 oe requivalent - there are hardly limitations in tablesize.
http://hjemmesider.diku.dk/~torbenm/Basics/basics_lulu2.pdf[^]
There are others as well of course.
Note however that while 30 to 40 years ago compiler writing was a "hot" topic for lots of people working in the field of CS, it is now a subject for a handful of specialists. Front end aspects of compilers are (reasonably) well understood, the real hot topics now are in optimization/code generation for a myriad of target architectures. Just look at the main topics in the development of the GNU compiler suite of the Clan folks: it is all optimization and code analysis.
For analysis and code generation more advances matching techniques are needed than simple CFG's.
Few compilers nowadays are simple "single person" projects, due to all the phases in the mapping parts from a parse tree to an architecture, compilers tend to be large. Note the difference with e.g. a Pascal compiler in the 70-ties, just a few thousand lines of Pascal code. But then,
there compilers were basically front end handlers for a simple language (and of course
using a handwritten recursive descent parser). Languages like e.g. C++ - and to a lesser extent C,
are hard to model using LR techniques, due to the interconnection between the meaning of the symbols and the syntax. So, in general front ends for such languages are using: yes, again hard crafted recursive descent techniques.
Whether you like it or not, do not expect many people to be interested in how a basic toolset is being developed, either in C#, assembler C Lisp of whatever language.
That being said. Be aware that there is an enormous amount of readable compiler literature, also lots of free books on the internet. I think you should be encouraged to continue development of a toolset, since although theoretically well understood, having the idea of understanding some theory does not always implies having the capabilities of creating a clean implementation.
And even if - in the CP community - there would be no interest in the subject, in my - humble - opinion it is a worthwhile exercise that at least would be read and studied by me.
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks for your input. I think on balance, you've given me a lot to think about, but also if only one person is interested or gains insight from something I write, it's still worth it. It's a labor of love. I love writing, and I love writing code. =)
When I was growin' up, I was the smartest kid I knew. Maybe that was just because I didn't know that many kids. All I know is now I feel the opposite.
|
|
|
|
|
With the trend today of txt speak and the appalling grammar used by some (quite a few) so called citizen journalists I would have thought a grammar parser an impossible task.
Never underestimate the power of human stupidity -
RAH
I'm old. I know stuff - JSOP
|
|
|
|
|
haha, well i'm not ambitious enough to try to process natural language. =) I'll leave that to my betters.
When I was growin' up, I was the smartest kid I knew. Maybe that was just because I didn't know that many kids. All I know is now I feel the opposite.
|
|
|
|
|
Because I haven't had a single one since yesterday - over 20 hours ago - and that' very unusual.
I didn't get anything from Codewitch in the stop smoking thread below for example.
"I have no idea what I did, but I'm taking full credit for it." - ThisOldTony
AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
|
|
|
|
|
Same here - nothing! 
|
|
|
|
|
I've stuck it up on S&B, but it's nice to know I'm not the only one!
"I have no idea what I did, but I'm taking full credit for it." - ThisOldTony
AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
|
|
|
|
|
Quote: it's nice to know I'm not the only one
Yes! I thought I had committed some sin! 
|
|
|
|
|
And ... I got an email for that one, but not the one before! 
"I have no idea what I did, but I'm taking full credit for it." - ThisOldTony
AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
|
|
|
|
|
Weird man! 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yep: looks like I woke the hamsters by posting in S&B.
"I have no idea what I did, but I'm taking full credit for it." - ThisOldTony
AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
|
|
|
|
|
OK, my emails started getting through as well. Maybe the hamsters slept in late this Sunday?
|
|
|
|
|
i am
Edit: never mind, I no longer am
When I was growin' up, I was the smartest kid I knew. Maybe that was just because I didn't know that many kids. All I know is now I feel the opposite.
modified 24-Nov-19 9:17am.
|
|
|
|
|
I got emails on my 'Rings a bell' post. That was avout 22 hours before... Also got from Sander about his exam abou 6 hours ago...
"The only place where Success comes before Work is in the dictionary." Vidal Sassoon, 1928 - 2012
|
|
|
|
|
Same here Paul
"We can't stop here - this is bat country" - Hunter S Thompson - RIP
|
|
|
|
|
..written a heavily commented, factored chunk of code that does some important, complicated task, and no matter how you structure or document it, it doesn't make sense to anyone but the computer?
not even you?
I've done that at least once this year, with LALR(1) parsing and it looks like I'll probably be doing it again (but with fa->regex conversion) within the next week or 3 depending on how long this takes.
I hate it, but that's what I get for punching above my weight class.
Sometimes code only works through sheer force of will.
When I was growin' up, I was the smartest kid I knew. Maybe that was just because I didn't know that many kids. All I know is now I feel the opposite.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sander Rossel wrote: I've written code that didn't make sense to anyone INCLUDING the computer!
That's where I'm currently at
When I was growin' up, I was the smartest kid I knew. Maybe that was just because I didn't know that many kids. All I know is now I feel the opposite.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
