|
Jeremy Falcon wrote: How do you like Core in general?
So far I'm impressed. It's a major improvement over core 1.0, in that one of the things I do a lot of, reflection, is working quite nicely. Other stuff we've come to love like Linq is working great too.
One annoying thing, when I add a reference to the "dependencies" graph, it doesn't set the "copy local" to true. In fact, it's blank. So the DLL doesn't show up in the bin\debug\netcoreapp2.0 folder, leading to a "unable to load assembly" error. Manually setting "Copy Local" to true fixed the problem, but still, Microsoft is dropping some bits, given my bizarre sub-sub-folder problem I mentioned in my other response.
What I'm trying to achieve ultimately should be fairly interesting but arcane -- I want to create a website where people can publish (as source code) microservices, like "verify the address with the USPS" or "get me the weather forecast" -- basically a library of public (and private) microservices from which you can build an application that get triggered automatically when a particular piece of "semantic data" is available. The output needs to be in some DSL that I'll have to create that will generate the HTML snippet to insert into the web page so you can view the results. The other fun part is slopping the code into a Docker container, building it there and running it in the container, so people don't blow away the server itself. I figure I'm opening a can of worms of malicious evil-doers, so at some point I'll have to figure out how to block access in the VM to the outside world, and only "approved" coders can write microservices that hit the web.
Anyways, that's the plan. It's a web version of what I've been working on with HOPE and FlowSharpCode, etc., and with .net core 2.0 I think I can finally support C# and true semantic types, rather than kludging it in a language like Python.
Sorry, probably more than you wanted to know.  On the other hand, if you have some free time... 
|
|
|
|
|
Ya know Marc, I see a pattern here. You're a bit of a forward thinker. I recall the MyXAML days in particular, when most people didn't know about declarative programming. This project sounds cool, considering the "semantic web" is a fundamental building block to Web 3.0 concepts. I'm not really sure what DSL means in this context, but if what you're getting at is self-building services that get served up depending on logic then whether I get it or not, I do know that's where we're headed in the future with AI and computers programming themselves. Bye bye everything being so static ya know.
You gonna write an article about it so us mortals can read about it?
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
|
Only a bit.
Take a look at this image: weather forecast Sorry it's rather small, I posted into my WordPress site. It was created by hitting the Weather Underground API for the weather given the semantics for an address (WU uses the city and state). The screenshot is a WinForm windows generated on the fly. All this stuff is already running as microservices on the desktop.
But for the web, take the same code and the DSL would specify how the content would be rendered. I don't want people having to use the crap that we know as HTML/CSS (unless they know what they're doing, like you) but rather, take the semantics of the output and define how, on a grid, you'd want the information layed out -- text, images, etc. So the DSL is a user-friendly way of defining where content goes, and the engine converts it into HTML.
|
|
|
|
|
Ah. I got ya. Kinda reminds me of MyXAML then in principle. Bootstrap works in a similar way actually and once you get used to grid-based structures it works pretty well.
As an aside... Just as long as we call them grids and not tables. That’s a dirty word despite it being a similar concept. Bad bad tables. But grids are cool. Go figure.
Anyway, I like the way your mind works man. Except when you dis JavaScript. The project is an interesting concept.
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
|
So, whilst my brains leak joyously out my nostrals and into soft pieces of paper, I remembered a question that I thought to pose before this ill-ustrious forum:
Why are credit scored ranged from 300-850 ? I mean, really, you could be dead and still have a 300 score. Why not start at zero? For that matter, one could also argue how there can be a cap on credit scores. Would a billionaire who always paid their debts, never declared bankruptcy, etc. really be limited in their credit worthiness (as if they needed credit).
Let's forget the latter question: why not use 0-550 for credit scores? A range of 550, itself, is rather odd, too.
So who knows what and why - or make up some stuff.
| Ravings en masse^ |
|---|
| "The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein | | "If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you are seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
W∴ Balboos wrote: Why not start at zero?
Darn VB developers. 
There are two kinds of people in the world: those who can extrapolate from incomplete data.
There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.
|
|
|
|
|
OPTION BASE 300 
If you have an important point to make, don't try to be subtle or clever. Use a pile driver. Hit the point once. Then come back and hit it again. Then hit it a third time - a tremendous whack.
--Winston Churchill
|
|
|
|
|
W∴ Balboos wrote: Why are credit scored ranged from 300-850 ?
Google knows how to get you the answer to anything.
Why is the FICO range between 300 and 850? - Quora
An interesting read actually.
(But blaming the VB Developers is still a better reason.)
|
|
|
|
|
Marc Clifton wrote: Google knows how to get you the answer to anything.
Indeed, 4 Answers - How does Google know everything? - Quora[^] 
There are two kinds of people in the world: those who can extrapolate from incomplete data.
There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.
|
|
|
|
|
I like this response the best:
Because We tell Google Everything.
|
|
|
|
|
0 - 549?
Also, 300 sounds better than zero. I think some people might do themselves in if they saw zero.
|
|
|
|
|
Slacker007 wrote: . I think some people might do themselves in if they saw zero.
Dave Ramsey would throw you a party if you hit 0.
There are two kinds of people in the world: those who can extrapolate from incomplete data.
There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.
|
|
|
|
|
If your score's that low, it would probably be a good thing if the owner of said score was relocated to the bottom of the food chain.
| Ravings en masse^ |
|---|
| "The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein | | "If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you are seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
Next, tackle the SAT score range. :p
|
|
|
|
|
No - that's already worked out:
Keeping finagling the scoring criteria so that each succeeding generation doesn't realize they significantly dumber than the one that preceded them.
| Ravings en masse^ |
|---|
| "The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein | | "If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you are seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
Coincidentally, spammers on CodeProject start with 301 points.
|
|
|
|
|
JavaScript timeouts, I mean. I'm trying my hand, for the first time ever, to do more than is necessary script. I'm developing a browser based flash-card game, and although I'm building up through independent functions, once I remove redundancy they all become temporally dependent, e.g. once started, the game uses timers to:
- Pause before showing the first card in a round
- Only show the card for a short time.
- Hide the card and show the multiple choice answer card for a medium time
- Repeat
Each timer triggers the next, in simple code, so it looks like my final code will look like a spiral to hell with nested timeouts. Unless I Really put my mind to it - it could use a break from my perennial nemeses, the little layout/css snafus.
"'Do what thou wilt...' is to bid Stars to shine, Vines to bear grapes, Water to seek its level; man is the only being in Nature that has striven to set himself at odds with himself."
—Aleister Crowley
|
|
|
|
|
Brady Kelly wrote: Each timer triggers the next
Found the bug.
Best Wishes,
-David delaune
|
|
|
|
|
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
|
May wanna think about that design man. In years and years of JavaScript I've never had to nest or chain timers like that... ever. Promises or events yeah, but not timers.
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
|
Promises are the way to go.
Something like this:
function wait(timeout) {
return new Promise(function(resolve) {
setTimeout(resolve, timeout);
});
}
function waitFor(timeout){
return function(result){
return new Promise(function(resolve){
setTimeout(function(){ resolve(result); }, timeout);
});
};
}
Usage:
wait(2000)
.then(function() {
alert("Thinking...");
return 42;
})
.then(waitFor(1000))
.then(function(result) {
alert("The answer is " + result)
});
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined."
- Homer
|
|
|
|
|
I'm the one that up-voted this, but I would like to add a suggestion. If his intent is to do simple animation with this, he's much better off using CSS3 animation with keyframes.
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks, Jeremy. I do plan to do basic animations, like a e.g. rapid fade-in of card as it is flashed on and fade-out when it gets "turned face down" again, but my main concern with timers is game logic. A visibly reducing wait until the next card is shown, then a very short wait while the card is shown, etc. Also the time the player has to choose an answer must be limited, quickest answers tracked, all that spade work.
"'Do what thou wilt...' is to bid Stars to shine, Vines to bear grapes, Water to seek its level; man is the only being in Nature that has striven to set himself at odds with himself."
—Aleister Crowley
|
|
|
|
|
Sounds cool man. I hope it comes out awesome.
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
|
Also, if your intent is simple animation, delay the showing of a card, etc. you can use CSS3 to pull that off with much less hassle.
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
