That's because too long of lines in content is poor for readability, they're doing that intentionally.
Zoom in with Ctrl +!
Eh, only if you are not used to it. I think using huge margins like that is a far too common web design crutch. If you were really worried about readability you could use columns or dynamic font sizes or something.
Although compared to the horrible things microsoft has been doing with UI's the past several years it is relatively benign. I played around with Win10 a bit. They are completely obsessed with right angles. And hiding the edges of UI elements so you have to guess where they are or hover over them.
Monkey Ball Warrior on
"I resent the entire notion of a body as an ante and then raise you a generalized dissatisfaction with physicality itself" -- Tycho
wheee. Demo of our latest website today internally. Not at all a complete product yet, just a "here's what it currently is". Hopefully I'm finding all of the "this works in dev, why the fuck is it broken on the staging site?" shit right now so that I can fix them or explain why it's reasonable for the issue at this point. Definitely found a few things.
That's because too long of lines in content is poor for readability, they're doing that intentionally.
Zoom in with Ctrl +!
Eh, only if you are not used to it. I think using huge margins like that is a far too common web design crutch. If you were really worried about readability you could use columns or dynamic font sizes or something.
Although compared to the horrible things microsoft has been doing with UI's the past several years it is relatively benign. I played around with Win10 a bit. They are completely obsessed with right angles. And hiding the edges of UI elements so you have to guess where they are or hover over them.
There's not enough text to fill it.
Dynamic font sizes would be crazy. The point of high resolution monitors isn't "HOW BIG CAN I MAKE MY ONE PROGRAM?!" it's "Yay now I can have more programs open at once at their native resolution!"
There's never really a good answer to this, it's almost certainly "change your browser for your monitor and zoom/unzoom" and has been that way since the late 90s when people started having wildly different monitor sizes.
not a doctor, not a lawyer, examples I use may not be fully researched so don't take out of context plz, don't @ me
class BaseCls
{
public:
virtual void Cleanup() {};
SIGNAL *ReleaseSignal() {
//stuff
Cleanup(); //SIGSEGV, code 1 "address not mapped to object"
//stuff
};
}
class derivedCls : public BaseCls
{
public:
void Cleanup() {};
}
class ddCls : public derivedCls
{
//nothing useful
}
void Function (void){
ddCls thing;
//this goes straight to the base class because the intermediates do not overload it...
// so it calls the virtual in the base class?
thing.ReleaseSignal();
}
This is obviously greatly simplfied, but the general flow is the same.
Only change is going from GCC 4.6/C++03 to GCC 4.9/C++11. I assume it is something to do with calling the virtual function, but I really have no idea.
Cleanup() is an empty function everywhere I've seen it, so I don't know why they bothered making it virtual (or making it in the first place).
Yes Visual Studio, complain in the part of the XAML where I defined the style that the target type doesn't match the thing I tried to apply it to, instead of where I made the bogus assignment.
That makes perfect sense.
At a fundamental level it's no different than just using HTML. The syntax differs. You're not using Jade or Handlebars for the templating so much in this case as using it for syntax, which many people prefer over HTML. No different than writing your React's JavaScript code in Coffee or TypeScript (which is a touch harder because of the way JSX works, but people are doing it).
class BaseCls
{
public:
virtual void Cleanup() {};
SIGNAL *ReleaseSignal() {
//stuff
Cleanup(); //SIGSEGV, code 1 "address not mapped to object"
//stuff
};
}
class derivedCls : public BaseCls
{
public:
void Cleanup() {};
}
class ddCls : public derivedCls
{
//nothing useful
}
void Function (void){
ddCls thing;
//this goes straight to the base class because the intermediates do not overload it...
// so it calls the virtual in the base class?
thing.ReleaseSignal();
}
This is obviously greatly simplfied, but the general flow is the same.
Only change is going from GCC 4.6/C++03 to GCC 4.9/C++11. I assume it is something to do with calling the virtual function, but I really have no idea.
Cleanup() is an empty function everywhere I've seen it, so I don't know why they bothered making it virtual (or making it in the first place).
So the call order here would be base::releasesignal -> derived::cleanup. Everything should be fine here unless something interesting happens in those stuff blocks
Except my core dump has it calling base::cleanup, and then GDB can't access the memory at the address the segfault is reporting (which is not the address for base::cleanup...) . So I'm not even sure what it's trying to do, but the segfault disappears if I comment out the call to cleanup() in the releasesignal method.
My suspicion is some kind of stack overflow (the main "stuff" block in the function is loading up a fuckoff-huge signal), but I'm not sure why that would only show up after I changed compilers.
Actually it should be going into derivedCls' cleanup shouldn't it?
Why is it attempting to use the BaseCls? Sounds like there might be a compiler option or some such that's fucking with this?
Only compiler options are -O0 and -std=gnu++11, with -Wall and -Wextra for good measure. Static analysis on the two classes doesn't come up with anything, either.
My next thing to try is either Address Sanitizer or Valgrind.
Posts
'Because then I can do "this" without going crazy with what the kids call "backslashes"'
I made a game, it has penguins in it. It's pay what you like on Gumroad.
Currently Ebaying Nothing at all but I might do in the future.
Eh, only if you are not used to it. I think using huge margins like that is a far too common web design crutch. If you were really worried about readability you could use columns or dynamic font sizes or something.
Although compared to the horrible things microsoft has been doing with UI's the past several years it is relatively benign. I played around with Win10 a bit. They are completely obsessed with right angles. And hiding the edges of UI elements so you have to guess where they are or hover over them.
There's not enough text to fill it.
Dynamic font sizes would be crazy. The point of high resolution monitors isn't "HOW BIG CAN I MAKE MY ONE PROGRAM?!" it's "Yay now I can have more programs open at once at their native resolution!"
There's never really a good answer to this, it's almost certainly "change your browser for your monitor and zoom/unzoom" and has been that way since the late 90s when people started having wildly different monitor sizes.
It pains me to go back to Java where single quotes is only for chars and double quotes are for strings.
Which can help save your sanity when dealing with long/complex expressions and you're using features like named groups.
I Python.
it's k
we got this
#hackathon
I won my last hackathon. The pressure is on you now, cc!
This is obviously greatly simplfied, but the general flow is the same.
Only change is going from GCC 4.6/C++03 to GCC 4.9/C++11. I assume it is something to do with calling the virtual function, but I really have no idea.
Cleanup() is an empty function everywhere I've seen it, so I don't know why they bothered making it virtual (or making it in the first place).
That makes perfect sense.
Okay, that makes sense; thanks for explaining!
So the call order here would be base::releasesignal -> derived::cleanup. Everything should be fine here unless something interesting happens in those stuff blocks
My suspicion is some kind of stack overflow (the main "stuff" block in the function is loading up a fuckoff-huge signal), but I'm not sure why that would only show up after I changed compilers.
ReleaseSignal calls Cleanup, so Cleanup should be the top most on your stack?
I imagine the problems are in //stuff
id have a shitload of nickels
Maybe even a dollar!
Why is it attempting to use the BaseCls? Sounds like there might be a compiler option or some such that's fucking with this?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D-8tMD77bvI
Haha, good way to end the thread!
New thread here:
http://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/200316/this-is-new-programming-thread-0-days-since-last-bug
Only compiler options are -O0 and -std=gnu++11, with -Wall and -Wextra for good measure. Static analysis on the two classes doesn't come up with anything, either.
My next thing to try is either Address Sanitizer or Valgrind.