• 2 Posts
  • 23 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: July 1st, 2023

help-circle
  • Probably not. Having actually played with making a WYSIWYG editor as a learning project markdown is too simplistic for the formatting needs of any non-trivial text editing, as a serialized storage format.

    You almost always end up back with your own data structure that you serialize into something like XML for storage. Or you end up supporting HTML or non-spec compliant syntax in your markdown.

    And if you care about performance, you’re not actually working with XML, HTML, or Markdown in memory. You’re working with a data structure that you have to serialize/deserialize from your storage format. This is where markdown becomes a bit more tedious since it’s not as easy to work with in this manner, and you end up with a weird parsing layer in-between the markdown and your runtime data structures.

    The commenter that’s downvoted is more correct than not IMHO (Also why are we downloading discussions??). Markdown is ill suited for “most WYSIWYG needs”. It tends to get augmented with XML or custom non-spec compliant syntax. The spec poorly supports layout (columns, image & media positioning, sizing…etc) and styling (font color, size, family, backgrounds…etc)


  • There are markup languages for this purpose. And you store the rich text as normal text in that markup language. For the most part.

    It’s typically an XML or XML-like language, or bb-codes. MS Word for example uses XML to store the markup data for the rich text.

    Simpler and more limited text needs tend to use markdown these days, like Lemmy, or most text fields on GitHub.

    There’s no need to include complex technology stacks into it!

    Now the real hard part is the rendering engine for WYSIWYG. That’s a nightmare.




  • This is a weird take given that the majority of projects relevant to this article are massive projects with hundreds or thousands of developers working on them, over time periods that can measure in decades.

    Pretending those don’t exist and imagining fantasy scenarios where all large projects are made up of small modular pieces (while conveniently making no mention to all of the new problems this raises in practice).

    Replace functions replace files and rewrite modules, that’s expected and healthy for any project. This article is referring to the tendency for programmers to believe that an entire project should be scrapped and rewritten from scratch. Which seems to have nothing to do with your comment…?









  • C# on non-Windows is not impossible, but it’s going to require effort infeasible for school projects like that one.

    You mean winforms (The windows specific UI) on non-Windows? Otherwise this is incredibly misleading, and plain wrong.

    C# in non windows is the norm, the default even, these days. I build, compile, and run, my C# applications in linux , and have been for the last 5+ years.





  • I do feel like C# saw C++ and said “let’s do that” in a way.

    One of the biggest selling points about the language is the long-term and cross repo/product/company…etc consistency. Largely the language will be very recognizable regardless of where it’s written and by who it’s written due to well established conventions.

    More and more ways to do the same thing but in slightly different ways is nice for the sake of choices but it’s also making the language less consistent and portable.

    While at the same time important language features like discriminated unions are still missing. Things that other languages have started to build features for by default. C# is incredibly “clunky” in comparison to say Typescript solely from a type system perspective. The .Net ecosystem of course more than makes up for any of this difference, but it’s definitely not as enjoyable to work with the language itself.


  • The great thing about languages like C# is that you really don’t need to “catch up”. It’s incredibly stable and what you know about C#8 (Really could get away with C# 6 or earlier) is more than enough to get you through the grand majority of personal and enterprise programming needs for the next 5-10 years.

    New language versions are adding features, improving existing ones, and improving on the ergonomics. Not necessarily breaking or changing anything before it.

    That’s one of the major selling points really, stability and longevity. Without sacrificing performance, features, or innovation.


  • Yessss.

    C#/.Net backends are the best. The long term stability, DevX, and the “it just works” nature of all the tooling makes it a great choice. It’s also fast, which makes scaling for most applications a non-issue.

    I’ve switched to postgres for DB from SQL server, have never looked back, would recommend.


  • douglasg14b@programming.devtoProgramming@programming.dev...
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    .Net + EF Core + Vue/TS + Postgres. Redis as needed, Kafka as needed.

    I can get applications built extremely quickly, and their maintenance costs are incredibly low. The backends are stable, and can hang around for 5, 10+ years without issue or problems with ecosystem churn.

    You can build a library of patterns and reusable code that you can bring to new projects to get them off the ground even faster.

    Would recommend.


  • Yeah but the ecosystem drags it about as far down as you can go.

    Backend development for large applications relies on stability, the JS ecosystem has anything except stability.This is okay for FE development where you naturally have a lot of churn.

    It’s a reasonable expectation that a backend built today should be maintenance free and stable over the next 5-10 years if no more features or bugfixes are required. And is buildable, as is, anywhere in that timeframe with minimal or zero additional work.

    Additionally, strong backends in the same ecosystem are similar, they use similar technologies, similar configs, similar patterns, and similar conventions. This is not the case for JS/TS backends, there is incredible churn that hurts their long term stability and the low-maintenance requirements of strong enterprise, and even more importantly small businesses backends.

    Mature ecosystems provide this by default this is why C#/Java is so popular for these long-standing, massive, enterprise systems. Because they are stable, they have well established conventions, and are consistent across codebases and enterprises.

    This is a perspective most devs in the ecosystem lack, given that half of all developers have < 5 years of experience and the vast majority of that is weighted into the JS ecosystem. It takes working with systems written in python, TS, JS, C#, Java…etc to gain the critical insight necessary to evaluate what is actually important in backend development.

    Edit: to be clear this isn’t just shitting on JavaScript because that’s what people do, I work with it everyday, TS is by far my favorite language. 2/3 of my career is with JS/TS. This is recognizing actual problems that are not singularly solvable with the ecosystem that pulls down its liability for backend development. There are languages and ecosystems are much better for your back end it’s not that scary to learn a new language (many of my co-workers would disagree it’s not scary 😒)


  • Hard agree.

    Less code is not a positive metric to measure your implementation by, and is not a valid premise to justify itself. Often increasing the complexity (again, LOC is not an indicator of complexity), tanking performance, and harming the debugging experience is a common result of the mentality. Things that make software worse.

    Not all one-liners are bad ofc, that’s not the argument I’m making. It’s about the mentality that less code is more good, where poor decisions are made on a flawed premise.