|
Oh my - I'm on your sh*t-list now! I am he who requested the icon.
Now - to try to win back some points, for Q&A, there's a little thumbs up image on the '5' side. I'd really go for having a little middle-finger up image on the left side.
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 |
|
|
|
|
|
Daffy duck calls the hotel desk and ask for a condom.
They ask "Shall we put it on your bill"?
I may not be that good looking, or athletic, or funny, or talented, or smart
I forgot where I was going with this but I do know I love bacon!
|
|
|
|
|
Don't try that with just any duck. These here may object: Ducks from RuneQuest RPG[^]
I have lived with several Zen masters - all of them were cats.
His last invention was an evil Lasagna. It didn't kill anyone, and it actually tasted pretty good.
|
|
|
|
|
Man! I must command you for your knowledge of all good things from Glorantha!
|
|
|
|
|
Found a PDF of RuneQuest 2nd edition and printed it out this morning.
I have lived with several Zen masters - all of them were cats.
His last invention was an evil Lasagna. It didn't kill anyone, and it actually tasted pretty good.
|
|
|
|
|
well... to tell you the whole story.. I moved on since then!
The Design Mechanism
Mythras is like RQ7!
it is also very extensible!
Witness, for example:
- Like M-Space (future rule set),
- RQ Firearms (~10 page freedownload), etc...
- ...
|
|
|
|
|
More than 30 years later and that girl is still fighting that lizard[^]...
I have lived with several Zen masters - all of them were cats.
His last invention was an evil Lasagna. It didn't kill anyone, and it actually tasted pretty good.
|
|
|
|
|
Lol!
Lizards are tough, as everybody knows!
|
|
|
|
|
groan - you better duck and run!
Latest Article - A Concise Overview of Threads
Learning to code with python is like learning to swim with those little arm floaties. It gives you undeserved confidence and will eventually drown you. - DangerBunny
Artificial intelligence is the only remedy for natural stupidity. - CDP1802
|
|
|
|
|
Afterwards, if it does not quack like a duck, is it still a duck?
|
|
|
|
|
Daffy is a cartoon - not a rubbered duck!
Socialism is the Axe Body Spray of political ideologies: It never does what it claims to do, but people too young to know better keep buying it anyway. (Glenn Reynolds)
|
|
|
|
|
I am working, super slowly, on a office like desktop / productivity application for table top, pen and paper, RPG game master app.
It supports multiple document type.
I am currently working on a "resource bag" type of document.
On the one hand I could serialize it with one method call with my custom made serializer (and data format).
On the other hand it seems to be a good fit for an "open standard format", like a zip file with a "properties.json" descriptor file.
And I am wondering,
Q: should I do it?
This is a rhetorical question anyway since, with my snail development speed I am not gonna bother...
But I still wonder about it abstractly.
1. it would be cool
2. it would be brittle (what if people create an incorrect "properties.json file?)
3. it would be work (I have to write entirely custom Save() / Load() method
4. not many people are gonna use my app anyway
5. the API to save such file already come fully functional with current code (i.e. my code), with strongly typed data model, why bother?
As a side note my serializer is open source and it can generate the data model it needs from a serialized data stream, in case people are curious and if I do not share the code (using upcoming .NET Native compile, for example), so people can always very easily reverse engineer data produced by my app...
|
|
|
|
|
|
That would have been too easy.
I have lived with several Zen masters - all of them were cats.
His last invention was an evil Lasagna. It didn't kill anyone, and it actually tasted pretty good.
|
|
|
|
|
F-ES Sitecore wrote: What's wrong with XML?
He can't spell it.
Michael Martin
Australia
"I controlled my laughter and simple said "No,I am very busy,so I can't write any code for you". The moment they heard this all the smiling face turned into a sad looking face and one of them farted. So I had to leave the place as soon as possible."
- Mr.Prakash One Fine Saturday. 24/04/2004
|
|
|
|
|
spot on!
|
|
|
|
|
since this (unexistent) format would be made for manual human editing friendliness... .json is more human friendly that XML, I think (and since this is my data format...)
|
|
|
|
|
Perhaps, but XML has the advantage of being typed. Anyway, the point I was getting at is that what you're doing is pretty much what XML is for which is already a standard so I don't see the need to re-invent the wheel.
|
|
|
|
|
Typed, shmyped!
Who needs that anyway?
I have lived with several Zen masters - all of them were cats.
His last invention was an evil Lasagna. It didn't kill anyone, and it actually tasted pretty good.
|
|
|
|
|
"schmyped"?! what is the meaning of this?!
|
|
|
|
|
answer this question honestly, which one is more manual human editing friendly of the 2 formats below?
at any rate I much prefer to manually edit json (which is the whole point of a human friendly format), much less boiler plate code. no useless header, no useless "closing" tag.
as to do it by code.. it also much less troublesome to use than XML as far as I experienced it...
(as illustrated below by the difference between JSON and XML serialization code below)
C#
public enum ItemType
{
Image,
Icon,
}
public class Item
{
public ItemType Type { get; set; }
public string Name { get; set; }
}
public class Document
{
public List<Item> Items = new List<Item>();
}
class Program
{
static void Main(string[] args)
{
var doc = new Document
{
Items =
{
new Item { Name = "foo", Type = ItemType.Icon, },
new Item { Name = "bar", Type = ItemType.Icon, },
new Item { Name = "snafu", Type = ItemType.Image, },
},
};
var json = JsonConvert.SerializeObject(doc, Formatting.Indented);
Console.WriteLine(json);
var xmlS = new XmlSerializer(typeof(Document));
var sb = new StringBuilder();
xmlS.Serialize(new StringWriter(sb), doc);
var xml = sb.ToString();
Console.WriteLine(xml);
}
JSON
{
"Items": [
{
"Type": 1,
"Name": "foo"
},
{
"Type": 1,
"Name": "bar"
},
{
"Type": 0,
"Name": "snafu"
}
]
}
XML
="1.0"="utf-16"
<Document xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema">
<Items>
<Item>
<Type>Icon</Type>
<Name>foo</Name>
</Item>
<Item>
<Type>Icon</Type>
<Name>bar</Name>
</Item>
<Item>
<Type>Image</Type>
<Name>snafu</Name>
</Item>
</Items>
</Document>
modified 5-Nov-18 7:24am.
|
|
|
|
|
You do know that you are asking people who have not been afraid to XAML together entire scenes and animations in a 3D engine or to design the views of their own UI in the same 3D engine?
I have lived with several Zen masters - all of them were cats.
His last invention was an evil Lasagna. It didn't kill anyone, and it actually tasted pretty good.
|
|
|
|
|
I know what you mean!
We have a saying in French, if I remember correctly (I left France so many years ago now): "there is no more blind than the one who don't want to see"...
|
|
|
|
|
That's only because I had to put so many namespaces into the useless header.
I have lived with several Zen masters - all of them were cats.
His last invention was an evil Lasagna. It didn't kill anyone, and it actually tasted pretty good.
|
|
|
|
|
I'd have to say "JSON".
It's also a lot easier to get XML wrong if you are human editing it. You can get JSON wrong of course, but there is so little "padding" that it tends to stand out a bit more.
Sent from my Amstrad PC 1640
Never throw anything away, Griff
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
|
|
|
|