|
OK, got it.
Reminds me of the old IBM Block mode terminals that had a physical map (with all literal fields and color specs, input specs and protection specs) and a data map that was only the fields that returned values. Both were sent to the terminal which would use a forward only processing to paint the screen and enable the unprotected fields. Any action key on the terminal transmitted only the data map to the invoking program. It was up to the program to split the data map back into fields and do any validation and processing of the data. (very efficient use of transmission bandwidth in the old days.) 
|
|
|
|
|
Anyone who hates it doesn't really know it and cannot come up with a better solution to a declarative UI descriptor. And it's muuuuuch easier to hate than to learn, now ain't it?
Also, anyone who intentionally is provocative to spew hate (out of boredom or some other psychological issue) only wants to drag people down to their level because it's very, very low and misery loves company. Probably has lousy relationships in real life and is generally not liked... except by other hateful people.
Happy Friday! May the winners in life have an awesome weekend. You guys rock.
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
|
Jeremy, as a friend I must tell you that some people might consider this post to be trolling.
The difficult we do right away...
...the impossible takes slightly longer.
|
|
|
|
|
I'm not sure if this was a joke about CSS or about me being anti-hate. If it was a joke about CSS then here's the obligatory "ooohhhh snap".
If it's about the anti-hate thing, I can totally see that. But, for those that I'd consider winners in life, it's no less trollish to them than having to endure >50% "I hate XYZ because I hate everything" type posts. This is why people I'd consider successful become disenchanted with this place. You talk about what you hate and everyone agrees. You talk about hate being bad and people get upset.
Not sure what you meant buddy. 
Jeremy Falcon
modified yesterday.
|
|
|
|
|
You know what's awesome?
Just dragging the stuff you want to place into place, including docking containers, and telling stuff to scale/align accordingly and never needing to screw with some esoteric second hand declaration (that quickly goes 3rd and 4th hand) of what you could just directly see and manipulate in real time even if CSS were sitting somewhere under that hood.
But what bit of language sits under it doesn't matter because it's the car that matters.
|
|
|
|
|
Not everything is drag and drop or WYSIWYG... unless you use VB. Not sure what you're getting at.
CSS is a descriptor no different than LaTeX or postscript. Saying you can't drag and drop with it has nothing to do with the language itself.
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
|
I am by no means an expert in CSS. But I agree, it is great for using for doing layouts. I have used it a bit and it is great. But I can also see how it would be a real pain to parse to properly display the intended layout, which I believe the other post you are taking a dig at was talking about. Please keep your personal dislike of others to yourself. You are both great contributers here and I personally enjoy reading both of your stuff.
There is a reason why politics and religion are not discussed on this forum, as it tends to drive a wedge between people, so posts like this are also doing the same.
You rock also, but please stop this.
Within you lies the power for good - Use it!
|
|
|
|
|
PJ Arends wrote: I am by no means an expert in CSS. But I agree, it is great for using for doing layouts. I have used it a bit and it is great. But I can also see how it would be a real pain to parse to properly display the intended layout, which I believe the other post you are taking a dig at was talking about.
As always... a tool is that is very good for a particular task doesn't specially need to remain that good in the moment you need something slightly different.
PJ Arends wrote: Please keep your personal dislike of others to yourself.
I am happy that this time I read the other messages before posting mine, I like the way you told it 
PJ Arends wrote: You are both great contributers here and I personally enjoy reading both of your stuff.
I totally agree
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.
|
|
|
|
|
I'm upvoting this even though you don't like my post. Why? I know you're not coming from a place of hate, buddy. Even though you think my post is stanky. 
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks for the confidence, and yes, you are right, I am not "hating you". But I know you know you are sometimes (being optmimistic here  )a bit polemic (and I think you even like it) and this time is one of those.
It is not always what you say, but how you say it.
I am not sure if you will search / try it, but I think you would profit a lot from "non violent / Mindful communication". I for sure am doing it, it needs a process, but it helps to reduce verrbal fights without needing to reduce your "saying what you want to say"
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.
|
|
|
|
|
Nelek wrote: Thanks for the confidence, and yes, you are right, I am not "hating you". But I know you know you are sometimes (being optmimistic here )a bit polemic (and I think you even like it) and this time is one of those. It is not always what you say, but how you say it.
Ah you know me well. I don't think I enjoy it, per se. Maybe subconsciously I do and I'm just in denial. But in my mind, I want to wake people up. People are so caught up in their automatic way of life with zero thought. And in here CP, it's a lot of hate by a lot of folks doing nothing in life.
Anyway, you only have two ways to break auto pilot habits with peeps stuck in their ways: shock factor or repetition. The more stubborn someone is though the less repetition works. Some folks literally stop mentally growing until they pass. And I don't know about you... but it's been my experience here that peeps don't have the level of chat you and I have, for instance, that would indicate a desire for personal growth.
Nelek wrote: I am not sure if you will search / try it, but I think you would profit a lot from "non violent / Mindful communication". I for sure am doing it, it needs a process, but it helps to reduce verbal fights without needing to reduce your "saying what you want to say"
I feel ya bro. And I 100% acknowledge I can be an ahole, but I'm an ahole from a place of love. It's usually me taking up for something or demanding a level of respect from peeps that most devs just don't know how to give.
Some food for thought though. Most successful peeps know (non-devs) know that engineering types are some of the most overly emotional peeps in the world. What's ironic is a lot of devs treat people like dirt because they're socially clueless, but then they cry when something happens to them. Just like a child. I find only overgrown children or losers take offense to what I just said. Us over in the adult world are like "yup".
One of my old bosses used to say, it's just as much the receiver as the speaker as to whether or not something "is an attack". And, I'm not saying it wasn't aggressive or that you're wrong. Just playing devil's advocate a bit to let you know, I'm always gonna annoy overgrown children.
Edit: And you could make the argument that's what an overgrown child would say. And to be honest, I agree. In my mind though, I'm still taking up for something and aggressively being anti-hate. That's the rationalization at least.
Jeremy Falcon
modified 13hrs ago.
|
|
|
|
|
Jeremy Falcon wrote: Anyway, you only have two ways to break auto pilot habits with peeps stuck in their ways: shock factor or repetition. The more stubborn someone is though the less repetition works.
...
...
know that engineering types are some of the most overly emotional peeps in the world. What's ironic is a lot of devs treat people like dirt because they're socially clueless, but then they cry when something happens to them. Just like a child.
I can sing a song about that, I am like this. My point is, I was even worse and I am trying to evolve. That's why I know that NVC works. Looking back I do recognise a strong inflection point in my social interactions close to when I started to get better on it (still a long way to go, though).
Jeremy Falcon wrote: Anyway, you only have two ways to break auto pilot habits with peeps stuck in their ways: shock factor or repetition. The more stubborn someone is though the less repetition works.
Yes, but exactly for this point, being rude is contraproducent, because people will the most of the times get deffensive and block whatever the message you are trying to bring over. I have experienced it a lot of times (on both sides, being the one that blocked and being the one that tried to "shock"). Lately I have realized that I can come way deeper when arguing with people just being polite and non attacking, than trying to confront them with MY truth.
Jeremy Falcon wrote: And I 100% acknowledge I can be an ahole, but I'm an ahole from a place of love.
And that's why I think you would take profit too from it. You can still be an assh.. in the message, but you pack it nicer and is better received than the other way.
Jeremy Falcon wrote: , it's just as much the receiver as the speaker as to whether or not something "is an attack".
That's the "one message, 4 meanings" theory and it is covered in NVC too, that's why good descriptions in the message help to reduce that. Yes, mostly is the receiver the one that "choose" (if possible) how to take something, but it is like in our jobs, the more concrete the specifications are, the less room for interpretations. If you pack your message in a neutral, good descriptive way, it will increase the chances that the receiver understands it the way you really wanted to communicate and reduces the number of potential fights, increasing the chances of triggering introspection in the other person
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.
modified 4hrs 20mins ago.
|
|
|
|
|
Nelek wrote: That's why I know that NVC works. Looking back I do recognise a strong inflection point in my social interactions close to when I started to get better on it (still a long way to go, though).
Just so you know, my stubborn butt is hearing you. It does sound interesting, and I just may check it out. Can't promise I'll learn though (kidding).  But, I already do this. You just don't see it on CP since is the place you go to for 80% hate, complaining, and arguing. It's all about what you don't like here and ironically I've made an online home here due to my mutual love for tech.
Nelek wrote: Lately I have realized that I can come way deeper when arguing with people just being polite and non attacking, than trying to confront them with MY truth.
Couple points to this...
Respect is earned. I'm extremely polite to people that deserve it. If you scroll back a bit, you'll notice I never said anything about Gary's gripe post, for instance. Why? Because Gary is awesome. He's genuinely a good person. I e-love that guy. You'll never catch me being rude to him. It just won't happen.
To reiterate my point, a lot of the peeps treat others like trash and get upset when they're called out on it. We can overthink or over talk this to death, but sometimes people are just aholes. I have no respect for that. Trying to play nice to placate their little, hypocritical feelings goes against my core. And I totally agree, that even if I'm right and they're wrong, defensiveness will ensure no point gets across so an eye-for-an-eye means nothing changes. But, by that time, I've already lost respect and don't care.
Like, for instance, if I see I did something wrong to respectful peeps on here I'm quick to apologize. Some others have done the same as well, but it's rare. Then it's mixed in with all this childish drama that completely overshadows it. I have no respect for that. People can hate... cool. I say someone is a loser and then it turns into something drawn out. I can't respect that either. Drama bro. Way too much drama.
Second point... I agree ish about the my truth part. Ish in the fact there is both objective and subjective truths. Objectively tacos exist. Subjectively they're either good or bad. You can say my delivery is subjectively bad. But, we can also objectively say people have hypocritical emotional issues. Perhaps you would include me in that, and that's cool (the colloquial you, not you you). But that doesn't mean I'm wrong about the emotional issues of peeps on here have just because someone would include me in that.
Deep stuff.
Nelek wrote: If you pack your message in a neutral, good descriptive way, it will increase the chances that the receiver understands it the way you really wanted to communicate and reduces the number of potential fights, increasing the chances of triggering introspection in the other person
But it also means you can never be authentic because you water down yourself to placate the over sensitive masses. I'd rather be genuine and get along with winners than to soften my speech so people who do nothing but hate cry. They're gonna hate me anyway, and are easily swayed, as that's what hateful people do.
I'm naturally way more polite to respectful people. Again, you just don't see it on CP or it's ignored and people only flip out and pay attention to when I say someone's a loser. I'm sure some will say I'm not polite in person too though, but it's always for the same reason. They're usually aholes and just not self-aware. In my past when I wasn't self-aware, I was just an ahole. These days that's not the case at all.
For instance, when you and I are chatting. I'd like to think I'm not an a** (this time you you). But if you (not you you again) are nasty, then you'll see the other side. I don't plan to get along with everyone. I want to get along with the winners who are self-aware and don't cry all the time.
Side note, by winner I don't mean financial or business, etc. I mean someone who creates the life they want to live filled with love and happiness. If money is part of that cool. If not, cool. So, by that definition I'm not there yet myself, but I do know that hatred and complaining is not the way to that. That's what losers do. Ironically, I'm complaining about that. So my lesson to learn is get better at shutting out the losers. They get too much of my time as it is and it only brings me down. I say this at a motivational convention and everyone agrees. I say this on CP and I get the drama.
Since you're the average of the 5 people you hang around the most, the only real solution is to stop hanging around losers (or ignore them). Which is something my stubborn butt clearly hasn't learned yet.
Jeremy Falcon
modified 2hrs 10mins ago.
|
|
|
|
|
Just to be clear, I'm not disagreeing with the point you're conveying. There's an imbalance in the force here since I'm a bull in a china shop as it were. My station is that I'll naturally get along with geniuses and/or genuinely goodhearted people who grew up.
My biggest folly is not ignoring those who deserve to be ignored and pointing out truths in a manner they're not mentally strong enough to absorb in the correct light. The latter is, of course, your point. The former is where I'm clearly lacking as solving that means the latter wouldn't happen.
Because it would be nice to find a person or two of high mental caliber to chat with, without having to endure the drudgery of the hateful masses. They're just distractions... persistent ones no less.
Jeremy Falcon
modified 2hrs ago.
|
|
|
|
|
|
PJ Arends wrote: But I can also see how it would be a real pain to parse to properly display the intended layout,
That's with any technology you don't know though. Struggling is one thing, saying you hate something because you don't know it is another. From my perspective, the lounge is where you go to read about "I hate this and that" from people who know little of what they're speaking about. When I'm learning something new, I find it silly to make "hate" my default mindset. And yet, that's what I see a lot of here. It's immature at best.
PJ Arends wrote: There is a reason why politics and religion are not discussed on this forum, as it tends to drive a wedge between people, so posts like this are also doing the same.
100% agree, man. But even outside the scope of politics, we don't discuss anything of substance here. It's Wordle, something hateful or complaining, or the occasional CCC. Every now and again, someone will talk about a good book something productive, etc. But, that's few and far, far between.
PJ Arends wrote: You rock also, but please stop this.
Fair enough, I guess I'm to the point where I've seen it all. And it seems the wrong things are what's tolerated. Like immature hatred is cool, as long as you have enough people to agree with your unfounded hate. It's all good. But pointing out that's how losers think... and we can't have that.
Jeremy Falcon
modified yesterday.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks buddy, hope you have an awesome weekend too.
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
|
While I still don't quite understand what's 'cascading' in CSS, agree that it has a transformational magic which brightens up a bland HTML page.
|
|
|
|
|
The name cascading comes from the specified priority scheme to determine which declaration applies if more than one declaration of a property match a particular element. This cascading priority scheme is predictable.
Software rusts. Simon Stephenson, ca 1994. So does this signature. me, 2012
|
|
|
|
|
It refers to the specificity rules it follows, which is usually what trips most people up. But, that's also usually because peeps don't read the manual before they say CSS sucks. CSS is awesome.
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
|
My favorite thing about CSS is how it spits in the face of the "Single Responsibility Principle".
I would argue that CSS is not a UI descriptor. CSS has no structural aspects - it alters existing structures, it doesn't declare/describe them.
|
|
|
|
|
Gwyll wrote: My favorite thing about CSS is how it spits in the face of the "Single Responsibility Principle".
No it doesn't. You just don't understand the hieracy of the DOM or specicficity. What I love is people that choose to hate something they know nothing about.
Gwyll wrote: I would argue that CSS is not a UI descriptor. CSS has no structural aspects - it alters existing structures, it doesn't declare/describe them.
It is. You should read up on what a descriptor is. You don't have to declare to fit that definition...
Data descriptor - Wikipedia
Also, it does have structures and describes things. Clearly you don't know anything about pseudo elements, transformations, animation, etc.
I've been "arguing" with devs online for 30 years. All with people who know nothing of what they're arguing about. So, sorry if I sound jaded, but again I've been arguing with devs online for 30 years who know nothing of what they're arguing about...
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
|
It's not CSS that I hate, it's the fact that we have to compensate for the different browsers because their implementers can't agree not to step outside established standards.
After 30 years of hearing peoples complains, they still seem to think that coloring outside the lines is a valid way to one-up the other browsers.
".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
|
|
|
|
|
I totally agree with that. I don't blame CSS for that though, I blame Microsoft, Apple, Mozilla, etc. And I certainly don't think it justifies perpetual hatred. The good news is it's sooooooo much better these days in regards to browser compatibility. A lot easier. These youngins just don't know how easy they have it.
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
