|
Yes! that!
I rather work with "Not a database" which is awesome than a so called "real database" that can only be used remotely close to 10% efficiency by "real DBA"
|
|
|
|
|
My business partner asked me earlier this week about a code generator tool that would allow her (mostly a non-programmer) to build prototype/poc web applications using a click-and-drag type of interface. I immediately responded with 'ironspeed' remembering that for a long time they were a sponsor here. Little did I know that they are now defunct due to a lawsuit. To my credit, September of last year, when this made news, was a rough time work-wise, so I wouldn't have been reading too much news! Oh, the irony! (Sorry, not funny...)
Anyway, she found an alternative (not free but not unreasonable either) with asprunner.net.
I haven't heard of them before now and apparently, she will be using it to start work on a project we discussed last week which I dismissed as not being feasible given the development resources available (me)...So, it seems she is replacing one code generating tool for another! One that doesn't talk back.
So, joking aside, has anybody here seen this product (asprunner.net) or the generated output thereof? If so, I hope it allows tweaking as I am sure to become responsible for it in the future.
Who knows? It could be a good thing...
Edit: I've just noticed that this post was marked as abusive/spam and got dinged for it. If someone could tell me what statement here is abusive, I'd sure like to know. For the individual(s) who complained, fuadiaf...
"Go forth into the source" - Neal Morse
modified 6-Jun-16 9:19am.
|
|
|
|
|
kmoorevs wrote: I hope it allows tweaking as I am sure to become responsible for it in the future.
See, this is why you, as a human code generator, cannot be replaced by a robotic code generator.
Never used asprunner.net, but their website doesn't same anything about support on mobile devices (that I noticed.)
kmoorevs wrote: Little did I know that they are now defunct due to a lawsuit.
Patent troll. Where's that gun?
Marc
|
|
|
|
|
Quote: So, it seems she is replacing one code generating tool for another! Laugh | One that doesn't talk back
A slippery slope you have been pushed out on.
|
|
|
|
|
A prototype does not, a website, make.
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
- You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
- When you pry the gun from my cold dead hands, be careful - the barrel will be very hot. - JSOP, 2013
|
|
|
|
|
John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote: A prototype does not, a website, make.
Why, are we talking, like, Captain, Kirk?
I am not a number. I am a ... no, wait!
|
|
|
|
|
That's not Kirk-speak. Retard.
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
- You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
- When you pry the gun from my cold dead hands, be careful - the barrel will be very hot. - JSOP, 2013
|
|
|
|
|
|
Didn't Elvis do that!
|
|
|
|
|
Being The King I suppose he got away with anything!
Get me coffee and no one gets hurt!
|
|
|
|
|
Americans have too many guns as it is.
Marc
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cornelius Henning wrote: but if you dare to infringe my right to own one:
I have no problem with your right to own a gun, I just wish we did more thorough background checks, had a waiting period, etc., before selling whackos guns.
Marc
|
|
|
|
|
Marc Clifton wrote: I just wish we did more thorough background checks, had a waiting period, etc., before selling whackos guns. ITYM before not selling whackos guns.
Kinda defeats the objective, otherwise.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
Mark_Wallace wrote: ITYM before not selling whackos guns.
Yeah, that's what I meant.
Marc
|
|
|
|
|
Not that I disagree with you, but what is the purpose of the waiting period?
And isn't that automatic in any case, if you do the background check properly?
|
|
|
|
|
The background check system can be exploited by the government. One day, they may/can decide to reject ALL gun purchase applications with no obligation to state a reason.
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
- You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
- When you pry the gun from my cold dead hands, be careful - the barrel will be very hot. - JSOP, 2013
|
|
|
|
|
Any guy who uses country music as an argument is a friend of mine!
Anything that is unrelated to elephants is irrelephant Anonymous
- The problem with quotes on the internet is that you can never tell if they're genuine Winston Churchill, 1944
- I'd just like a chance to prove that money can't make me happy. Me, all the time
|
|
|
|
|
Americans should keep their guns!
So we could keep having a good laugh about them in the years to come!
|
|
|
|
|
We don't expect foreigners to understand.
Besides, nobody in England was laughing when we used our guns to kick them back across the Atlantic.
I personally lost a lot of respect for Australia when so many of her citizens complied with the post-Port Arthur mandatory gun confiscation. In contrast, Americans routinely reject and resist such things (I cite the recent attempt by the states of Massachusetts and New York to force residents to merely register their "assault weapons". Such a high percentage refused to comply that the states do not enforce the law.
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
- You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
- When you pry the gun from my cold dead hands, be careful - the barrel will be very hot. - JSOP, 2013
|
|
|
|
|
John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote: Besides, nobody in England was laughing when we used our guns to kick them back across the Atlantic.
And nobody in America was laughing when you turned all those guns on each other wiping out around 750,000 men in an argument about the right to enslavement. Not many laughing now, come to that, as the country racks up around 12000 homicides and 22000 suicides by firearm a year to say nothing of a further 750 deaths in firearms accidents or pranks gone wrong to add to the 850000 assorted non-fatal injuries. I presume you would not dream of the unregulated use of motor vehicles which are responsible for less deaths annually? Doesn't it itch just a little bit having your heads in the sand for so long? 'If it's broke don't fix it' doesn't really suggest a land of progress and freedom to us foreigners. So you're right. We don't understand why, despite the shocks, you continue to stick your fingers back in the same socket over and over again! We're just forever grateful that it's not us!
I am not a number. I am a ... no, wait!
|
|
|
|
|
First, this is about foreigners laughing at Americans exercising their rights.
Second, the civil war wasn't about slavery - at all. It was about the industrial north trying to control textile production in the south. In short - it was about MONEY, and the civil war itself was manufactured by the federal government to appease the big money political lobbies representing northing industries. Furthermore, the southern states were merely trying to secede from the union (a Constitutionally protected act, by the way). The Federal government decided they weren't going to allow it and used force to prevent it from happening. The blame for the death toll rests squarely on the shoulders of the government.
Suicides are irrelevant. People bent on killing themselves can be quite creative and/or opportunistic. If they don't have a gun, they'll find another way. Beyond that, I don't accept your statistics because, being the flaming euro liberal that you are, you probably searched for the "report" that gave you the numbers you wanted. Statistics don't mean sh|t to anyone but the people that paid for the study.
Finally, you don't have to f*ckin understand. In point of fact, I don't even expect you to, because you are STILL convinced that your government is looking out for your best interests. This makes you an idiot as well. If you can't defend yourself, you're just a slave in one form or another. Enjoy.
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
- You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
- When you pry the gun from my cold dead hands, be careful - the barrel will be very hot. - JSOP, 2013
|
|
|
|
|
John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote: Finally, you don't have to f*ckin understand. In point of fact, I don't even expect you to, because you are STILL convinced that your government is looking out for your best interests.
This got me curious....
When was the last time you fought against your government?
So.. how many tank and jet fighter do you own?
If you plan on resisting the US military I am curious about your odds...
Also... How would you comment on my impression that French people do a better job at fighting their government with their never ending strikes that American people do with their weapons?
modified 3-Jun-16 15:41pm.
|
|
|
|
|
Super Lloyd wrote: So.. how many tank and jet fighter do you own?
If you plan on resisting the US military I am curious about your odds...
0) We don't have to have "tanks and jet fighters", and proof of that is the cave-dwellers kicking our military's ass in Pakistan (and Russia's ass before that).
1) I don't know where you get the idea that "planning" to resist the US military. And if you had any kind of reading comprehension (much less, a true desire to get some knowledge about what you're inferring), you would know EXACTLY why the 2nd Amendment is in our Bill of Rights. Here, I'll break the amendment down for you:
"A well regulated Militia," - Back when the Constitution was drafted, regular army troops were referred to as "regulars" because they were trained/equipped with standard tactics, strategies and weapons. "Well regulated" does not mean controlled, it means trained and equipped. Further, because the adopters of the Constitution did not trust a standing army, their actual intent was to have the populace be able to form a militia for local defense. Furthermore, this means that the arms we can keep and bear should be battlefield capable, because without that condition, the right to keep and bear is essentially a pointless right (unless you're a cave-dweller in Pakistan, evidently).
"...being necessary to the security of a free State, " - The founders realized that without arms, a citizen could not defend himself, his family, or his country from a tyrannical (or invading foreign) government.
"the right of the people to keep and bear Arms," - this clause infers that the right to defend oneself is a pre-existing natural right. This means the right to bear arms is not "granted" by the government, nor restricted to "militias", but is inherent by the very existence of the individual.
"shall not be infringed." - This means the government cannot infringe on our right to keep and bear arms.
If you need proof of ANY of the intent of the founding fathers regarding the reason for having the 2nd Amendment, there is PLENTY of proof available in the writings and speeches of the very people that wrote the Constitution. My advice is to start with the Federalist Papers, and go from there. I don't expect anyone here that is not a US citizen to be willing to do that kind of research, or even be informed/educated enough about US history to even be aware of the facts. However, you have no f*ckin' place telling Americans that we're f*cked up because we own guns.
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
- You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
- When you pry the gun from my cold dead hands, be careful - the barrel will be very hot. - JSOP, 2013
|
|
|
|
|
John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote: "...I don't know where you get the idea that "planning" to resist the US military...
from that:
John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote: , I don't even expect you to, because you are STILL convinced that your government is looking out for your best interests
It quite looked like it was implied...
|
|
|
|
|