Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

6

________deleted wrote

PHP so I can help emma with raddle :D

3

zombie_berkman wrote

Programming in php probably cased me as much brain damage as all my concussions

1

DissidentRage wrote

I don't mind it so much. But I might also have a different background. A lot of PHP developers I know got their start dealing with WordPress. I heard enough bad things about it I never bothered until I was coerced into it at my previous job. I've been at it for 11 years and went from straight up procedural PHP to OOP. I can see a lot of the arguments for PHP being badly designed, but I can still do just about anything that needs doing. I think dealing with Node.JS is even worse, tbh...

2

zombie_berkman wrote

Maybe things changed in 10 years since I last touched it up it was a weak typed security train wreck back then

1

DissidentRage wrote

Yeah PHP 5.4 or so started the slow introduction of strong typing. In 7 you can strongly type most scalars, Classes and Interfaces, and it's getting better about that with 7.2, which also folds in the Sodium encryption library. It's still a little funky on stuff like magic methods, and inconsistency in naming and parameter conventions, but it's a lot better now than it was 10 years ago. There's also a very solid package management system called Composer.

1

zombie_berkman wrote

I'm guessing looking at it now I wouldn't even know what's up since web2.0 was barely a thing when I used it

1

DissidentRage wrote

We've got MVC frameworks which use drivers for things like DBALs, mail servers, caches, external file systems (like S3 buckets), etc. which can be changed by altering a config file or two and maybe swapping out one package in favor of another. At least one of the major frameworks has its own CSRF resolution, throttling, etc.

You can still write shit code, but it's so easy to find something that does stuff like that for you there's really no excuse. And in the cases where something doesn't exist, there are countless guides on doing things the right way.

And I realized I'm kind of evangelizing. :v

5

yaaqov wrote

Can I say LaTeX?

2

notanaccout wrote

Is it still worth it to learn latex with all the office suits we have today? II so, do you have any resources you could share? I'm a science student btw

6

yaaqov wrote (edited )

I absolutely find it worth it, but I'm in a field that relies on lots of complex, idiosyncratic diagrams. It's a pain sometimes, but:

  • It's immensely powerful, with an ever-expanding array of tools as people create and release them. Powerful to the extent that you can, for example, author, illustrate, and typeset something like a professional chemistry or linguistics textbook on your own.

  • Pretty much everything you'll need for it is completely free, if not open-source, I believe. It also integrates well with R and Python and stuff, as long as you learn to use the tools that people have created and released.

  • There's a very active and knowledgeable community online, from whom you will inevitably read many, many, discussions. Most of these are on Stack Exchange, in my experience.

  • In addition to just feeling cool as a result of being able to typeset anything in plaintext code/markup (conceived broadly), there's a huge advantage to having the actual editable document be just a plain text file, which is that, as microsoft word and the like inevitably "evolve", older files may become difficult or impossible to open properly without unpredictable changes to them. While there's plenty of innovation with LaTeX, it's mostly very backwards-compatible and, if not, it's trivially simple to find an older version of the software to download and run.

  • An expansion/concrete example of the point above: If I were using, say, R to analyze a large set of data, and trying to write up the results in Word, I pretty much have no choice but to export R's graphs as images and drop them into my document. What if I want to change something about those graphs, or introduce new data to process? Well, with LaTeX I can actually have my data sets and R code incorporated as part of the same plaintext file as my LaTeX code. When I compile the document, the R code will run and be output to LaTeX to typeset. All within one file. It's awesome.

Now, as for beginner's resources, most of the ones I know are geared towards my subfield. I would start by searching something like "latex for <your field here>". Also wikibooks is good for getting started, everything from the software itself/installation to a wide range of things you might want to do while writing.

3

Mullvaden wrote

I find it worth it too, and I don't know much about science. I'm typesetting a lengthy document now and just the visual quality is way above any word processor I've used.

3

surreal wrote

i'm a Python lover but i would choose Rust, it gives you low level control with high level abstractions and the semantics are very nicely designed to prevent you from writing bugs. Also the development of the language is rather fast with many new and interesting techniques being implemented in the compiler and it has been influenced but really all languages and programming paradigms.

3

Mullvaden wrote

I'm tied between Rust and Common Lisp. If I learn Lisp I know I'll feel like a zen master but Rust is probably more of practical use.

3

DissidentRage wrote

C++ because there's just so much more to do with it. But goddamn if learning low-level langs isn't hard. I know C is lower and Assembly is even lower than that but I also don't want to reinvent that many wheels. C++ is low enough to be flexible but high enough I don't have to do stuff like managing variables to keep track of array lengths.

2

mftrhu wrote

Ugh, I would probably go with Python - sane syntax, good standard library, huge number of available libraries - but it'd chafe, I like trying out new things and I especially like messing around with esolangs.

1

DissidentRage wrote

Personally my only problem (and it's an unfortunately significant one) with Python is the divide between the 2.x and 3.x communities.

2

mftrhu wrote

By now I'm just ignoring Python 2 unless I have to deal with libraries/apps that have not been ported to 3 yet. Or, I guess, if I'm messing with my Palm, which I just remembered is running 1.5.2.

1

DissidentRage wrote

1.5.2? holy shit

2

mftrhu wrote

I know, right? Pippy 1.5.2, compiled way back in 2001-06-11. But it still runs nicely, even if missing huge chunks of the standard library/expected functionality the overall syntax/feel barely changed since.