web development takes too long
-
Stick to Basics - no (so called) helper frameworks HTML5/CSS3/javaScript/php - and then roll your own. Naturally, like any programming, there's an induction period where you get used to the idea of how to do things and the comparative uniqueness of the isolation of the client from the server and statelessness. But it all becomes familiar. And you maintain control. For myself - I don't give a damn about the conventional wisdom of the layout. I want all the components on the page to work exactly as I wish them to (along with the server). Design - well, they could hire a web designer. I'll keep it clean and, in particular, a very small set of interfaces for my users (familiarity breeds contentment). I go for eye-friendly, and, since these are for office workers to stare at all day, kind to the eyes based on colors/contrasts/font-sizes. If an extension is added (really, 'when' an extension is added) is must not interfere with existing code and design. They must embrace or ignore one another - no half-assed measures or you'll pay down the line. Also, never use the latest-and-greatest extension to (HTML/CSS) as you then have browser incompatibility(s) or even worse, you handle it, fork you design, crash, and burn. Remember - you are working concurrently with three-to-five languages per page (if you count SQL). It's not like the happy place in your C++ environment - everything made to a single monolithic paradigm. And you need to redesign there, too. Thereby set up a stable world and the problems all but disappear.
"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein
"If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010
W∴ Balboos wrote:
I want all the components on the page to work exactly as I wish them to
That's the problem, especially with CSS. And I roll my own stuff a lot of times, except these days I do use jquery precisely because it eliminates some of the inconsistencies of "DHTML", especially taking multiple browsers into account. Less stress. Still, it's mostly CSS that sticks in my craw. It's just so freakin arcane. Even I get the concepts enough that I could roll my own basic CSS engine, things like lack of a hard "height" feature, clearfix problems, and just the layout quirks - it's a damned mess. I know one person that can navigate that mud and make it seem easy, and if I wasn't a better person I'd hate them for it :laugh:
When I was growin' up, I was the smartest kid I knew. Maybe that was just because I didn't know that many kids. All I know is now I feel the opposite.
-
it always comes down to trial and error. make a thing, try a thing, go back and *remake* the thing because DHTML and CSS are funny in a sad kind of way - like an old married couple that hates each other but won't divorce. is there a better way to do it? I mean other than schlepping it off onto someone else, which is my first choice. :laugh: is there some magic to web development that makes it not suck?
When I was growin' up, I was the smartest kid I knew. Maybe that was just because I didn't know that many kids. All I know is now I feel the opposite.
I had really good luck with combining B.E.M[^], a css preprocessor, and something like patternlab[^] to develop the front end independently of the back end. That lets you develop the front end without the nasty css cascades, and by using components with mock data and multiple states.
Elephant elephant elephant, sunshine sunshine sunshine
-
I had really good luck with combining B.E.M[^], a css preprocessor, and something like patternlab[^] to develop the front end independently of the back end. That lets you develop the front end without the nasty css cascades, and by using components with mock data and multiple states.
Elephant elephant elephant, sunshine sunshine sunshine
God bless JSON and JSONP these days I don't have a problem separating front and backend. Through talking about it on this thread I've come to realize it's mostly CSS I hate. And it's because its layout engine is just awful.
When I was growin' up, I was the smartest kid I knew. Maybe that was just because I didn't know that many kids. All I know is now I feel the opposite.
-
W∴ Balboos wrote:
I want all the components on the page to work exactly as I wish them to
That's the problem, especially with CSS. And I roll my own stuff a lot of times, except these days I do use jquery precisely because it eliminates some of the inconsistencies of "DHTML", especially taking multiple browsers into account. Less stress. Still, it's mostly CSS that sticks in my craw. It's just so freakin arcane. Even I get the concepts enough that I could roll my own basic CSS engine, things like lack of a hard "height" feature, clearfix problems, and just the layout quirks - it's a damned mess. I know one person that can navigate that mud and make it seem easy, and if I wasn't a better person I'd hate them for it :laugh:
When I was growin' up, I was the smartest kid I knew. Maybe that was just because I didn't know that many kids. All I know is now I feel the opposite.
honey the codewitch wrote:
I know one person that can navigate that mud and make it seem easy,
So - you have supplied apriori proof that it can be done if you know what you're doing - really like any other programming languages. Now - there's no need for you to specialize for a now-and-then pain. I came to my current job for my C++ - but am now 'the' web programmer. What I have found, as a self criticism, is that I usually know how to get the page to appear as I wish - but don't want to make the effort. Between sending you my first mail in this series and your reply I worked on a modification. It didn't work out and I commented it out, for now. I do know the solution (in programming, I guess it's always properly written as "a solution", not "the solution") but I have neither the urge nor the time, right now, to go there. Really easy: make a two-column table into three so I can right-justify a like (whose class makes it look like a button) on the far right of a <th> element and combine all the lower rows to mimic the original two-column behavior with a column span, along with using <td>, instead, and gain back some control. Or whatever floats by when I open the page again. All of the above formatting is from AJAX (php). Right now, I just don't feel like it. So, instead of putting in the effort it got " // ".
"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein
"If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010
-
honey the codewitch wrote:
I know one person that can navigate that mud and make it seem easy,
So - you have supplied apriori proof that it can be done if you know what you're doing - really like any other programming languages. Now - there's no need for you to specialize for a now-and-then pain. I came to my current job for my C++ - but am now 'the' web programmer. What I have found, as a self criticism, is that I usually know how to get the page to appear as I wish - but don't want to make the effort. Between sending you my first mail in this series and your reply I worked on a modification. It didn't work out and I commented it out, for now. I do know the solution (in programming, I guess it's always properly written as "a solution", not "the solution") but I have neither the urge nor the time, right now, to go there. Really easy: make a two-column table into three so I can right-justify a like (whose class makes it look like a button) on the far right of a <th> element and combine all the lower rows to mimic the original two-column behavior with a column span, along with using <td>, instead, and gain back some control. Or whatever floats by when I open the page again. All of the above formatting is from AJAX (php). Right now, I just don't feel like it. So, instead of putting in the effort it got " // ".
"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein
"If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010
Tables are easy and honestly if I didn't sort of hate myself for relying on them I'd just stick with them.
When I was growin' up, I was the smartest kid I knew. Maybe that was just because I didn't know that many kids. All I know is now I feel the opposite.
-
Tables are easy and honestly if I didn't sort of hate myself for relying on them I'd just stick with them.
When I was growin' up, I was the smartest kid I knew. Maybe that was just because I didn't know that many kids. All I know is now I feel the opposite.
honey the codewitch wrote:
if I didn't sort of hate myself for relying on them I'd just stick with them.
I never understood this anti-table nonesense. They work and make many things very much easier (and readable ! ! ! !). Someone got a burr up their ass and decided to denigrate them. Why should I care what they think? And by proxy, why should you care? Wait for them to offer to do your work for you. (by the way - if life were all tables we'd not have this thread).
"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein
"If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010
-
honey the codewitch wrote:
if I didn't sort of hate myself for relying on them I'd just stick with them.
I never understood this anti-table nonesense. They work and make many things very much easier (and readable ! ! ! !). Someone got a burr up their ass and decided to denigrate them. Why should I care what they think? And by proxy, why should you care? Wait for them to offer to do your work for you. (by the way - if life were all tables we'd not have this thread).
"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein
"If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010
One of the rationales is it combines layout and structure, whereas if you avoid them in favor of CSS tables and such you can better "skin" your site using CSS. However, no matter what you do in the real world with HTML and CSS there's going to be intermingling of structure and layout. Another rationale, and this one is compelling: lack of fluidity in layout which means entirely separate content for mobile, which means more work. So I don't know. I'm ambivalent about tables due to the second thing.
When I was growin' up, I was the smartest kid I knew. Maybe that was just because I didn't know that many kids. All I know is now I feel the opposite.
-
One of the rationales is it combines layout and structure, whereas if you avoid them in favor of CSS tables and such you can better "skin" your site using CSS. However, no matter what you do in the real world with HTML and CSS there's going to be intermingling of structure and layout. Another rationale, and this one is compelling: lack of fluidity in layout which means entirely separate content for mobile, which means more work. So I don't know. I'm ambivalent about tables due to the second thing.
When I was growin' up, I was the smartest kid I knew. Maybe that was just because I didn't know that many kids. All I know is now I feel the opposite.
honey the codewitch wrote:
entirely separate content for mobile,
Mobile? We don't do no stinkin' mobile! I create software for grownups earning their living. And a fraternal district full of users on an informational site. So far, no complaints from a single phone-addicted user although Google analytics puts them at ca. 40% share. You have made my LG flip-phone weep.
"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein
"If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010
-
honey the codewitch wrote:
entirely separate content for mobile,
Mobile? We don't do no stinkin' mobile! I create software for grownups earning their living. And a fraternal district full of users on an informational site. So far, no complaints from a single phone-addicted user although Google analytics puts them at ca. 40% share. You have made my LG flip-phone weep.
"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein
"If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010
well for certain things mobile is desirable, even for work. I worked at a little dev house in the early aughts that adopted mobile early to create apps for mobile a salesforce and mobile technicians. It was pretty lucrative, and shockingly practical.
When I was growin' up, I was the smartest kid I knew. Maybe that was just because I didn't know that many kids. All I know is now I feel the opposite.
-
Wow, I just had a flashback to PWS and the little merlin looking character! :laugh: Fun times!
"Go forth into the source" - Neal Morse
-
you're probably right about the javascript, as I've had better luck sanitizing, or rather "sanifying" my code using say, jquery than i have using CSS 3 - the layout issues still plague me. There's so many corner cases
When I was growin' up, I was the smartest kid I knew. Maybe that was just because I didn't know that many kids. All I know is now I feel the opposite.
-
honey the codewitch wrote:
There's so many corner cases
True, but at least we now have
border-radius... remember when we had to position tags over the corners to get rounded borders? ;-):laugh: that's not quite what i meant
When I was growin' up, I was the smartest kid I knew. Maybe that was just because I didn't know that many kids. All I know is now I feel the opposite.
-
Well ... there is Blazor: Blazor | Build client web apps with C# | .NET[^] - which should get rid of >50% of the actual suckery: Javascript. It still uses HTML and CSS though :sigh: I haven't tried it - I learned many years ago that anything microsoft count as "before RTM" (or even "before SP1") is realistically called "beta" - but it does look very interesting.
Sent from my Amstrad PC 1640 Never throw anything away, Griff Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay... AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
Blazor is indeed very interesting. If it was launched before I had to learn javascript I would probably never learn it. But I kinda like it now (javascript) it is messy in a beautifull way :-D
-
it always comes down to trial and error. make a thing, try a thing, go back and *remake* the thing because DHTML and CSS are funny in a sad kind of way - like an old married couple that hates each other but won't divorce. is there a better way to do it? I mean other than schlepping it off onto someone else, which is my first choice. :laugh: is there some magic to web development that makes it not suck?
When I was growin' up, I was the smartest kid I knew. Maybe that was just because I didn't know that many kids. All I know is now I feel the opposite.
HTML/CSS/JavaScript has long been a black hole for programming and debugging time. Those technologies were never intended to do what is asked of them today. My advice is to focus on WebAssembly (in the Microsoft world, that is Blazor). HTML and C# is all that is needed. The temptation for web developers is to fall back on JavaScript (via JS Interop in Blazor) instead of learning how things are done in Blazor (HTML and C#).
-
HTML/CSS/JavaScript has long been a black hole for programming and debugging time. Those technologies were never intended to do what is asked of them today. My advice is to focus on WebAssembly (in the Microsoft world, that is Blazor). HTML and C# is all that is needed. The temptation for web developers is to fall back on JavaScript (via JS Interop in Blazor) instead of learning how things are done in Blazor (HTML and C#).
webassembly is great but i imagine it's hell on page load times.
When I was growin' up, I was the smartest kid I knew. Maybe that was just because I didn't know that many kids. All I know is now I feel the opposite.
-
it always comes down to trial and error. make a thing, try a thing, go back and *remake* the thing because DHTML and CSS are funny in a sad kind of way - like an old married couple that hates each other but won't divorce. is there a better way to do it? I mean other than schlepping it off onto someone else, which is my first choice. :laugh: is there some magic to web development that makes it not suck?
When I was growin' up, I was the smartest kid I knew. Maybe that was just because I didn't know that many kids. All I know is now I feel the opposite.
1. Don't support Internet Explorer. The only reason it exists anymore is for legacy business web apps and Microsoft has told web devs to stop supporting it in new sites and applications. 2. Invest in a browser screenshot tool like LambdaTest to cut down on your browser testing time. You can run a test and only do detailed testing on the screenshots that don't look right. 3. Use source control like git. This is a general development tip, but many in Web Dev seem to skip stuff like this to save time. It is worth it to be able to have a history of your changes. There are plenty of IDEs like Visual Code Code that integrate with git directly to make this really easy. 4. Use a smart deployment tool like git-ftp. Free for all FTP'ing everything to server will just lead to issues in the long run, especially if you need multiple people pushing changes out to your server. 5. Setup a local web server for development. This cuts all of the time involved pushing your changes out to test them. Their are plenty of AMP packages to pick from (XAMP or MAMP comes to mind) also if you have Windows Pro you can install IIS and install MySQL and PHP natively. You can also use a host file tool to redirect your domain name to your local machine while testing. I prefer HostProfiles for this on Windows (open to other suggestions if anyone knows of a better Windows tool in active development) and Gasmask for this on macOS.
-
:laugh: that's not quite what i meant
When I was growin' up, I was the smartest kid I knew. Maybe that was just because I didn't know that many kids. All I know is now I feel the opposite.
-
webassembly is great but i imagine it's hell on page load times.
When I was growin' up, I was the smartest kid I knew. Maybe that was just because I didn't know that many kids. All I know is now I feel the opposite.
Nope. A page may load a little slower the first time, but not really that noticeable. Since webassembly is stateful, not stateless, page operation is actually faster. And loads are minimized to just what is needed. You should try it for yourself. I think you will find that server-side Blazor is quite fast, especially for intranet applications. The improvement in stability and decreased development time more than makes up for a few microseconds of latency or initial page load delay.
-
Nope. A page may load a little slower the first time, but not really that noticeable. Since webassembly is stateful, not stateless, page operation is actually faster. And loads are minimized to just what is needed. You should try it for yourself. I think you will find that server-side Blazor is quite fast, especially for intranet applications. The improvement in stability and decreased development time more than makes up for a few microseconds of latency or initial page load delay.
That's interesting. It must support partial assembly loading to keep page load times down i guess. That's cool, if true. Even loading the entire System.dll into a page is reams of "asm.js"
When I was growin' up, I was the smartest kid I knew. Maybe that was just because I didn't know that many kids. All I know is now I feel the opposite.
-
I wrote a kids' educational package using that Merlin animated character. Fitted onto 5 floppy disks and was a lot of fun. Written in VB3... happy days. (No, really!)
:thumbsup: Happy days indeed! :) I had been a CS major in the mid '80s but got banned from the computer lab when I refused to give up a terminal to an upperclassman. I quit school and did factory work for 10 years. During that time, I stayed completely away from computers. When I finally went back to school for programming, I was absolutely amazed at how much things had changed! :omg: I bought my first windows machine and copy of Visual Studio 6 in '98. Finally, no more lab! I had my own personal compilers! I had a Personal Web Server! Programming had moved from just procedural to graphical/object/event driven. It was a whole new world and I enjoyed it immensely... so much to learn and create! :) Merlin reminds me of that almost magical feeling of empowerment and freedom when I finally got back in the game. :)
"Go forth into the source" - Neal Morse
