|
|
Spammers don't spend that sort of time on their pet projects.
|
|
|
|
|
You misunderstand.
irrelevant or unsolicited messages sent over the internet, typically to a large number of users, for the purposes of advertising, phishing, spreading malware, etc.
Definition courtesy Bing.
Spammers are by definition those who create spam, which is irrelevant or unsolicited messages sent over the internet. It doesn't have to be for monetary gain, even though that's the usual purpose of spam. A ten year old spamming "fart" in IRC is just as much a spammer as a thirty-six year old spamming Pfizer advertisements to your inbox.
|
|
|
|
|
Sounds like I completely misunderstood. Are you saying you're getting spammed by someone promoting/trying to push their framework/whatever it is?
|
|
|
|
|
I have personally received at least one unwanted message spamming one of these things that I can remember for sure, and I have the vague feeling that it's the most recent in a consistent dribble of spam. The OP mentioned that he sees new ones of these in the news every single day. I can't corroborate that as I don't look at this website (just the newsletters), but that certainly sounds like spam to me.
It doesn't have to be numerous or frequent to be spam, just irrelevant and unwanted. If my birth was a message on the internet it would be spam for example, even though it only happened once.
|
|
|
|
|
Asday wrote: The OP mentioned that he sees new ones of these in the news every single day
Ok, so I had missed/misunderstood that part. I do go over the daily newsletter, and get the weekly "new articles" summary (whatever it's called), but I've proactively subscribed to that. I can't recall any sort of promotion(-ish) type of messaging from CP beyond that.
Asday wrote: It doesn't have to be numerous or frequent to be spam, just irrelevant and unwanted. If my birth was a message on the internet it would be spam for example, even though it only happened once.
You must hate watching the news.
|
|
|
|
|
You must hate watching the news.
So much that I don't do it, yes. I'm the sort of guy that uses adblock to block "trending" panels on websites.
|
|
|
|
|
It's probably as much a symptom of developer as branded product.
Go make your blog, put some stuff on github, SEO yourself.
Not just/specifically here, but a bunch of stuff out there only exists so that someone can point to it and say it exists. It exists almost solely to be indexed by a crawler so that searching the author's name turns up programming results.
|
|
|
|
|
Does that actually work? If you search my name you get a bunch of different dudes who are all much more attractive and apparently successful than me. If you want to find me and what I do (and have done) you have to search my username.
|
|
|
|
|
Mileage may vary for John Smith versus Alexandre Humblebottom III.
But anyone can still drop a link (into resume/CV) pointing to a longer list of links.
|
|
|
|
|
I'm having my hands full with understanding .NET framework(s)
|
|
|
|
|
obligatory XKCD.
CI/CD = Continuous Impediment/Continuous Despair
|
|
|
|
|
I am not even sure what a framework is and had no idea many existed. All I know is I am looking forward to utilizing "Dear ImGui" perhaps it is a framework as I love its speed appearance and seemingly easy to understand programming interface and quite dislike MFC.
|
|
|
|
|
A framework is a library that calls your code. You have to structure your code in specific ways so the framework knows how to call it. Generally they take a huge amount of work off your hands in return for being reasonably inflexible.
An example of a framework would be the Django web framework. The ./manage.py script you use to start the web server calls into Django to handle the command line input, and that's the only command in the management script, control never returns to your entrypoint. Instead, the framework does frameworkey stuff to look at the rest of your code, and calls the bits of it that it recognises in specific scenarios, such as calling a view function when the matching URL conf is matched against a request against the webserver.
Compare and contrast to Dear ImGui, which never takes control. You set up the environment, then you call into the library, it does what it needs to, and returns. Control remains with you, Dear ImGui never has need to call back into your code unless you give it a specific callback, in which case it only calls that.
|
|
|
|
|
Edward Aymami wrote: Am I a hopeless luddite? No, you are someone who draws inferences based on impressions, rather than careful analysis of context.
«The mind is not a vessel to be filled but a fire to be kindled» Plutarch
|
|
|
|
|
And that's why I stay the hell away from web development.
GCS/GE d--(d) s-/+ a C+++ U+++ P-- L+@ E-- W+++ N+ o+ K- w+++ O? M-- V? PS+ PE Y+ PGP t+ 5? X R+++ tv-- b+(+++) DI+++ D++ G e++ h--- r+++ y+++* Weapons extension: ma- k++ F+2 X
|
|
|
|
|
You and me too!
|
|
|
|
|
I'm pretty sure ~90% of that stuff gets created as a learning experience for the author. Hell, even the stuff that makes it into mainstream may lack a product vision, growing instead of being designed.
I personally would not consider myself a luddite but I think "do we really need that" more often than "hey, that's some cool new stuff". Actually, I'm a huge tech/software enthusiast. It's just that I'm also a huge fan of use cases, tech solving use cases, not tech for the sake of tech.
|
|
|
|
|
Am I a hopeless luddite?
If you are, then so am I. I develop my own reusable bits and pieces of course (not sure I'd call them frameworks exactly) but I only pull in an external dependency when I really need it. libFLAC is a good example of the that. Wouldn't want to implement it myself! But then, that's not a framework either, just a library.
The only framework proper that I do use as ASP.Net. I use it for the 'code behind' pages on my website, and I think it's terrific.
Paul Sanders.
If I had more time, I would have written a shorter letter - Blaise Pascal.
Some of my best work is in the undo buffer.
|
|
|
|
|
A steep learning curve can be great for learning something useful, and most learning is at least somewhat useful. Also, sharing the project may help others to learn something useful.
I do agree that many projects are best done "the hard way" of doing them by hand, particularly one-time projects, but where's the fun in that?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Are there too many frameworks?
Of course not.
I don't care how many frameworks there are.
I anyway just ignore them all.
|
|
|
|
|
I feel the same way for sure. I occasionally get emails from CodeProject containing links such as Introduction to ELENA Programming Language, which is just completely insane to me. It has 186 stars on github after a direct push to people's email inboxes. It's quite clearly unasked for, unneeded, and dead on arrival.
As a programmer I well understand the itch to strip naked and walk backwards into the sea, writing your own programming language, or compiler, or operating system, or making your own hardware, or whatever, but we're not all Terry A. Davis. Sometimes you should be honest with yourself about your worthless throwaway hobby project being worthless hobby project.
|
|
|
|
|
Asday wrote: your worthless throwaway hobby project
Oh such truth!
|
|
|
|
|
Not sure I wouldn't reword that to be language, library, or framework. If there were no new applications, we really wouldn't need to exist?
To me, it's staying in scope in relation to time. New language? There was a time I'd bite and go down the inevitable rabbit hole of looking in depth. No more as I've seen way too many fade into relative obscurity after never getting any traction. And, I don't have the time. Libraries are of course useful, depending on how well they work and the overhead, both in terms of bloat and how much process modification needed to use it. Frameworks can have the same issues.
I go back to scope. I'm not a luddite, I love to learn new things. After 30 years (yikes), there's not a week that goes by that I'm not learning or using something new. But this isn't a spare-time hobby so if it's not within the scope of the SOW, at best I'll make a note of it for the future.
Are you a luddite? Probably not, just maybe pragmatic or really busy
|
|
|
|