That, right there, is a perfect example of why folks need to stop trying to shoehorn web apps everywhere they don’t belong. It’s a use-case for a proper native mobile app if ever there was one.
That’s why you should’ve just handled arbitrary rotations instead of inventing a finite predefined set of orientation “modes” in the first place.
Things get a lot easier in the long run if you aggressively look for commonalities and genericize the code that handles them instead of writing bunches of one-off special cases.
everything would be fluid in the layout and you would need to set what should go on top of what. And having this feature doesn’t seem worth the hassle of making if work, or even using it.
Who is doing that? In my experience, “web apps” are on the web or occasionally on desktop and are fine. Slack for example, is a fabulous desktop app and has used web tech from day one to great success
VS code is an electron app, there are a few others that have a simple enough purpose that they shouldn’t be using a whole dedicated chrome engine to function.
Vs code is an exemplary app and supports what I’m saying. As far as others…what’s the right amount of complexity for using electron? Imo the maintenance advantages alone almost justify using it. It’s not appropriate for every app but slack and vs code are pretty stellar examples of how well it can work.
VS code is a good app in spite of using electron, not because of it. There’s no reason a simple plaintext editor needs to allocate 300MB of ram even without extensions just to launch, and there is definitely no reason a plaintext editor should require compiling chromium to build from source.
Slack is fine, but only when you exclusively use slack. Throw in an actual browser, discord, VS Code, Whatsapp, teams (?), etc. each with their own chromium instance and now your 16GB of ram are being eaten up at idle.
That just means it shouldn’t be a native app or a web app, but instead should be a plain ol’ webpage that doesn’t try to do app-y things in the first place. The notion that web pages have any legitimate reason to know your viewport size (let alone anything at all about the screen hardware itself) is like one of those “statements dreamed up by the utterly deranged” memes, except not satirical.
Seriously: literally the entire defining principle of HTML (well, aside from the concept of “hyperlinks”) is that the client has the freedom to decide how the page should be rendered, but misguided – or megalomaniacal – graphic designers webmasters front-end web “devs” have been trying to break it ever since.
Lol - in your other comment you suggested that web devs key off of screen rotation to resize the page, but now you’re saying the client shouldn’t know anything about the viewport at all? Which is it? And why would the rotation angle be useful if I don’t know the aspect ratio of the screen? Or are we now assuming that widescreen will be a thing forever? I thought your ingenius idea was to be able to handle any use case.
Lol - in your other comment you suggested that web devs key off of screen rotation to resize the page, but now you’re saying the client shouldn’t know anything about the viewport at all? Which is it?
Legitimate apps key off screen rotation do fancy stuff. Web pages let the browser render them and don’t try to do fancy stuff. It’s not that fucking hard.
or a web app, but instead should be a plain ol’ webpage
I did not know about that distinction.
Hmm, so are there actual inadequacies in the browser-rendered standards that lead people to do this? I’d buy that it’s purely webpage sponsors wanting to be an all-powerful decider that controls what everyone sees and possibly thinks, but on the other hand I don’t know enough about browser rendering and page design to be sure. All my webpages are pretty spartan and scream “backend guy”.
It’d sure be nice if we could go back to circa-2012 with no popups or stupid bloat.
I sort of agree with you to a degree, but I also think that the browser having knowledge of the size of your viewport actually has some use. Now, I would probably like it more if all webpages were just made with the restriction of not knowing the viewport size since that would dictate some design choices. Cellphones can just scroll around the page anyways. They should be second class citizens on the internet anyway in my opinion. The smartphone has been one of the worst inventions for the human race with how much it seems to isolate a lot of people more than connecting them.
This could totally be adapted into a game for a very interesting immersive experience. Imagine entire worlds of gameplay that adapted to the orientation of your viewport.
Linux phones aren’t supported because it’s an Xorg feature. Usually Linux phones use Wayland for the better (touch) experience. If someone wanted to they could implement it on a Wayland compositor, but given that no other OS I know of supports diagonal mode, I wouldn’t hold my breath.
i’d like to know what hallucinogen you’re on or neurological damage you have, as you keep responding to things i never said-- i never mentioned a 30 year-old cell phone.
I’m the guy who designs those. They pay me the big bucks to make sure a hacker feels at home when violating our Gibson, after all. We’re one big family here.
There is a debate to be had about how far this is morally acceptable. If you‘re trying to promote your nonprofit and ask friends to ask their friends to look at it I‘d say thats fine.
But asking bluntly for fake reviews is not ok imo. I‘d report this person immediately. I‘d rather make a nice post on every social media platform that fits my topic and plainly ask folks for feedback. This just seems lazy and uninspired.
Developer1: @developer2: could you take a look, I know u know stuff about this.
Developer2: can’t reproduce. Might be able to if I get the app logs in trace level, the blood of 3 dragons and a signed autograph of Michael Jordan’s third hello world program.
User1: here are some other unrelated logs at info level only and nothing else.
my website’s backend is made with bash, it calls make for every request and it probably has hundreds of remote arbitrary code execution bugs that will get me pwned someday, it’s great
edit: to clarify, it uses a rust program i made to expose the bash scripts as http endpoints, i’m not crazy enough to implement http in bash
it behaves like a static file server, but if a file has the others-execute permission bit set it executes the file instead of reading it
it’s surprisingly nice for prototyping since you can just write a cli program and it’s automatically available over http too
I know about the CGI standard, but mine does things a little differently (executable files don’t just render pages but also handle logging, access control, etc. when put in special positions within a directory), so I still think it was worth the afternoon i spent making it.
i thought it was neat how php lets you write your website’s logic with the same directory tree pattern that clients consume it from, but i didn’t want to learn php so i made my own, worse version
Considering it uses day then month, 24hr clock, and distance in km, I’m guessing the reason why it’s not “human readable in American” is because it’s intended to be “human readable for pretty much everybody else”
I once worked in a software shop where all release packages had the Unix epoch timestamp in the filename. Yes, these sorted brilliantly making it trivial to find the last one. But good luck finding a build from a specific date/time.
A real answer to your question though, as long as you can get it to reconnect, even if you have to close the window first, it should still have your changes to the file ready to save. These will be cached (somewhere?) unless you close the file.
programmer_humor
Active
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.