|
Tell me about it! I did back end development for years, everything from your standard N tier applications to entire server based programming environments (before .NET I build a web farmable version of ASP)
The front end stuff was so ugly but that was prior to HTML5. Now it's gone from not as ugly per se, but just obfuscated in other ways. Too many frameworks. Too much transpilation (I suspect HTMLX adds to this problem) to the point where everything is so abstract you can't tell what's actually happening anymore.
Furthermore I suspect there's a single lynchpin NPM package that the whole web depends on and is maintained by a disgruntled developer who could pull the repo at any minute.
Check out my IoT graphics library here:
https://honeythecodewitch.com/gfx
And my IoT UI/User Experience library here:
https://honeythecodewitch.com/uix
|
|
|
|
|
As with most things in the programming world and, for that matter, life in general, there is an xkcd about that : xkcd: Dependency[^]
"They have a consciousness, they have a life, they have a soul! Damn you! Let the rabbits wear glasses! Save our brothers! Can I get an amen?"
|
|
|
|
|
Mitchell J. wrote: has anyone here seen HTMX? Yes, it looks interesting enough that I'd thought I'd explore it more and maybe write a short article, but work and life keeps getting in the way.
|
|
|
|
|
Mitchell J. wrote: has anyone here seen HTMX? What are your thoughts? I've done a cursory glance at it, so I'm not an expert. It's horrible though and only serves to show just how little design thought goes into new crap coming out for the web. You shouldn't be mixing logic with presentation -- even if it's UI logic. All it does is clutter up crap more than it should, makes it that much harder to hand off the presentation to a designer, etc. It's like they took the bad parts of Angular and made it worse.
History repeats though, what sucks is cool and what's cool sucks, over and over again because people really don't care to learn history about code or enough about design or real development to stop this kinda stuff from propagating.
Jeremy Falcon
modified 9-Feb-24 12:52pm.
|
|
|
|
|
Aren't you a little young to be talking like a curmudgeon?
The difficult we do right away...
...the impossible takes slightly longer.
|
|
|
|
|
I'm old at heart. Reached the I've seen it all phase... just need that front porch and cane to make it legit.
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
|
XML, HTML, HTML5, HTMX, XAML.
To me, they're all the same; but everyone (except me) "hates" XAML.
"Before entering on an understanding, I have meditated for a long time, and have foreseen what might happen. It is not genius which reveals to me suddenly, secretly, what I have to say or to do in a circumstance unexpected by other people; it is reflection, it is meditation." - Napoleon I
|
|
|
|
|
Wordle 965 5/6*
⬛🟩⬛⬛⬛
🟩🟩⬛🟨⬛
🟩🟩🟩⬛⬛
🟩🟩🟩⬛⬛
🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩
|
|
|
|
|
Wordle 965 3/6
🟩⬛⬛⬛🟨
🟩⬛🟩🟩🟨
🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩
|
|
|
|
|
Wordle 965 4/6
⬜⬜🟩🟨⬜
🟩🟩🟩⬜⬜
🟩🟩🟩⬜⬜
🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩
|
|
|
|
|
Wordle 965 4/6
🟩⬜⬜🟨⬜
🟩⬜⬜⬜🟨
🟩🟩🟩⬜⬜
🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩
|
|
|
|
|
⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜
⬜🟨⬜⬜🟨
🟩⬜🟩⬜⬜
🟩⬜🟩🟩🟨
🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩
In a closed society where everybody's guilty, the only crime is getting caught. In a world of thieves, the only final sin is stupidity. - Hunter S Thompson - RIP
|
|
|
|
|
Wordle 965 5/6
⬜⬜🟩⬜🟨
⬜⬜🟩⬜⬜
🟩🟩🟩⬜⬜
🟩🟩🟩⬜⬜
🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩
|
|
|
|
|
Wordle 965 3/6*
⬜⬜⬜🟨⬜
🟩⬜⬜⬜🟨
🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩
"I have no idea what I did, but I'm taking full credit for it." - ThisOldTony
"Common sense is so rare these days, it should be classified as a super power" - Random T-shirt
AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
|
|
|
|
|
Wordle 965 4/6*
🟩🟩⬜⬜⬜
🟩🟩⬜⬜⬜
🟩🟩🟩⬜⬜
🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩
Almost symmetrical!
Does anyone check if they "beat the bot"?
Happiness will never come to those who fail to appreciate what they already have. -Anon
And those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by those who could not hear the music. -Frederick Nietzsche
|
|
|
|
|
Wordle 965 5/6
⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛
🟩🟩🟩⬛⬛
🟩🟩🟩⬛⬛
🟩🟩🟩⬛⬛
🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩
Ok, I have had my coffee, so you can all come out now!
|
|
|
|
|
Wordle 965 4/6
⬛⬛⬛⬛🟨
🟩🟩🟩⬛⬛
🟩🟩🟩⬛⬛
🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
|
I've never used MVVM. Today I realized I had to. So I started reading.
It's a bunch of 10 dollar words to explain a 5 dollar concept.
Microsoft, honest edition: "We originally intended you bind your business data directly to controls but when that didn't work in the real world, we noticed people would create an intermediary binding object to transform the data, and then bind to that. We formalized what y'all have been doing since VB6, and gave it a confusing name to make it our own, because you are lowly plebes."
Check out my IoT graphics library here:
https://honeythecodewitch.com/gfx
And my IoT UI/User Experience library here:
https://honeythecodewitch.com/uix
|
|
|
|
|
MVVM is old news, too. Now it's MVVM-C
I'm so glad I don't do UI stuff anymore. It seems to be the discipline with the worst jargon obsession, though we're all guilty of it to some degree.
|
|
|
|
|
I was and professionally still am in the same boat as you, thankfully.
But my side projects have lead me to C# source generator technology (which I knew I'd pick up eventually as I absolutely love making code write code)
That led me to find use cases for it.
That led me to the UI arena.
And WinForms is basically NRND at this point.
So here I am, an embedded dev, but with a hobby, looking for something to apply it to.
Check out my IoT graphics library here:
https://honeythecodewitch.com/gfx
And my IoT UI/User Experience library here:
https://honeythecodewitch.com/uix
|
|
|
|
|
Jon McKee wrote: the discipline with the worst jargon obsession, I want to agree with you here. I think it's because UI is a visual thing, there's an element of fashion about it. What's in, what's out.
The difficult we do right away...
...the impossible takes slightly longer.
|
|
|
|
|
Richard Andrew x64 wrote: What's in, what's out. Didn't you want to mean "crap in, crap out"?
M.D.V.
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
|
|
|
|
|
Have seen interviewers ask this question: Given a simple project, with a UI, and a simple database, how would you structure your code as per MVVM (meaning which pieces-of-code would you place in your M, VM and V parts).
And have heard diverse answers; the M and V parts seem pretty straightforward, but with VM, there's lack of clarity.
So, it seems like MVVM is (was?) the new buzzword (Just like OO was in the early 90s. Most programmers of that time said that they were doing OO, but very few understood its real meaning; some even thought that merely including the keyword class made a non-OO code as OO).
|
|
|
|
|
Amarnath S wrote: So, it seems like MVVM is (was?) the new buzzword
Yes.
Amarnath S wrote: Most programmers of that time said that they were doing OO, but very few understood its real meaning;
Kinda falls down here though, because it sort of implies that eventually mud that "what is the role of the ViewModel?" yields will give way to something more cohesive as it gains traction.
It has been almost 20 years since WPF was released, and like I said I was already doing this even in VB6 in the 90s before without calling it that.
The issue I think, is that the ViewModels roles can only ever be "clearly" defined in the most general sense - it is a data translation facility. They are muddy because they are an adapter between one type of presentation - the datacentric model - and another - the User centric View.
So I don't think they'll ever really become clearly defined or even understood by people.
And honestly? We'll come up with a different pattern ultimately because of it.
Give it another 20 years.
Check out my IoT graphics library here:
https://honeythecodewitch.com/gfx
And my IoT UI/User Experience library here:
https://honeythecodewitch.com/uix
|
|
|
|
|
I always thought of it as having only one difference from "normal" programming in WinForms. The View contained all the code for animations and layout; other than that, its pretty self-explanatory.
|
|
|
|