|
Thread Rules 1. This is not a "do my homework for me" thread. If you have specific questions, ask, but don't post an assignment or homework problem and expect an exact solution. 2. No recruiting for your cockamamie projects (you won't replace facebook with 3 dudes you found on the internet and $20) 3. If you can't articulate why a language is bad, don't start slinging shit about it. Just remember that nothing is worse than making CSS IE6 compatible. 4. Use [code] tags to format code blocks. |
On January 21 2014 05:15 Tobberoth wrote:Damnit, the HSM-2 is just brutal on microcorruption.com. I'm at a point where I can direct the code where I want, even add a bit of assembly myself, but since I don't know the password and can't unlock the door from the code, I can't imagine how to proceed, other than sending random passwords to the lock which is obviously not an option. I didn't even realize that's what the HSM-2 did at first, was quite disappointing to crack it enough to get "Access granted", yet no door opening ^^ EDIT: And there I solved it. I'm kind of surprised + Show Spoiler +that interrupt 7f completely bypasses the password. .
I did Reykjavik the same way as you - I think that's the point of that one.
And they solve that exploit for the next one - if you figure it out let me know, I'm still working on it ^^ but I have some actual assembly homework to do now lol
|
Hey guys I am a programming Newb that started about 2 months ago. My focus is learning web design stuff on my own. I got HTML and CSS pretty easy and practiced making websites for the last month and a half. I am starting to feel pretty fluent in those languages where now I can think about what I want and then code it right out rather than having to look up how to do it. I learned Jquery during the last two weeks and that was pretty easy as well. I was able to use that on my websites and really get a good hands on learning experience with jquery as well
Now im learning Javascript and im in a rut. I am using code academy right now which is giving me good knowledge on things such as variables/arrays etc but I am having troubles in regards to actually practicing Java script as I dont really get how it translates into actual things on the web like HTML CSS and J query. If that makes any sense.
Does anybody have any good books they could recommend on javascript?
|
On January 21 2014 08:55 XXXSmOke wrote: Hey guys I am a programming Newb that started about 2 months ago. My focus is learning web design stuff on my own. I got HTML and CSS pretty easy and practiced making websites for the last month and a half. I am starting to feel pretty fluent in those languages where now I can think about what I want and then code it right out rather than having to look up how to do it. I learned Jquery during the last two weeks and that was pretty easy as well. I was able to use that on my websites and really get a good hands on learning experience with jquery as well
Now im learning Javascript and im in a rut. I am using code academy right now which is giving me good knowledge on things such as variables/arrays etc but I am having troubles in regards to actually practicing Java script as I dont really get how it translates into actual things on the web like HTML CSS and J query. If that makes any sense.
Does anybody have any good books they could recommend on javascript?
Have you tried w3schools?
|
Hyrule19167 Posts
have you tried get out?
w3schools is awful, never use it
|
On January 21 2014 10:18 tofucake wrote: have you tried get out?
w3schools is awful, never use it
I was going to inb4 this =D and then I realized I had better things to do with my life than that and I didn't. But I have a real question for you tofu - what do you think of http://eloquentjavascript.net/ ? I kinda wanted to learn js and I learned a bit from that book, it seemed nice to me but I dunno, I'm mostly a C++ programmer tt
|
On January 21 2014 08:55 XXXSmOke wrote: Hey guys I am a programming Newb that started about 2 months ago. My focus is learning web design stuff on my own. I got HTML and CSS pretty easy and practiced making websites for the last month and a half. I am starting to feel pretty fluent in those languages where now I can think about what I want and then code it right out rather than having to look up how to do it. I learned Jquery during the last two weeks and that was pretty easy as well. I was able to use that on my websites and really get a good hands on learning experience with jquery as well
Now im learning Javascript and im in a rut. I am using code academy right now which is giving me good knowledge on things such as variables/arrays etc but I am having troubles in regards to actually practicing Java script as I dont really get how it translates into actual things on the web like HTML CSS and J query. If that makes any sense.
Does anybody have any good books they could recommend on javascript?
In jquery
$(<id>).html(<insert html code here>)
?
That said once you get the basics down its much neater to move to a client side html preprocessor.
|
On January 21 2014 10:18 tofucake wrote: have you tried get out?
w3schools is awful, never use it We should have this link available for whenever people reference W3Schools
http://www.w3fools.com/
|
if you're in the software engineering field, should you get a masters? why? when should you get it?
|
On January 21 2014 14:40 icystorage wrote: if you're in the software engineering field, should you get a masters? why? when should you get it? At least in Sweden, it depends a bit what you want to work with. There's so much IT jobs flying around that you really don't need a masters for "normal" software development, master is needed if you want the fancy ones, and especially ones where there's research involved. If you're aiming to get one, I'd say get it right away after your bachelors, that way you're "warm in your clothes" in terms of academics. Also, if you only get a bachelors and then get a job, it will probably be hard to motivate yourself to go back to school.
|
On January 21 2014 08:35 Cyx. wrote:Show nested quote +On January 21 2014 05:15 Tobberoth wrote:Damnit, the HSM-2 is just brutal on microcorruption.com. I'm at a point where I can direct the code where I want, even add a bit of assembly myself, but since I don't know the password and can't unlock the door from the code, I can't imagine how to proceed, other than sending random passwords to the lock which is obviously not an option. I didn't even realize that's what the HSM-2 did at first, was quite disappointing to crack it enough to get "Access granted", yet no door opening ^^ EDIT: And there I solved it. I'm kind of surprised + Show Spoiler +that interrupt 7f completely bypasses the password. . I did Reykjavik the same way as you - I think that's the point of that one. And they solve that exploit for the next one - if you figure it out let me know, I'm still working on it ^^ but I have some actual assembly homework to do now lol It took me a while, but I just beat Montevideo (I assume that's the one you're working on). I found out quite quickly what I needed to do, but it took a while to implement it. If you need any hints or whatever, let me know.
EDIT: beaten johannesburg and santa cruz as well. This is starting to get tricky, but man, you sure learn a lot of assembly. Can't wait to go back and optimize my cpu cycles, at the moment my rank is atrocious since I'm being a bit lazy with my injections. However, beating as many levels as possible is definitely my priority at this point.
|
Hyrule19167 Posts
On January 21 2014 11:27 Cyx. wrote:Show nested quote +On January 21 2014 10:18 tofucake wrote: have you tried get out?
w3schools is awful, never use it I was going to inb4 this =D and then I realized I had better things to do with my life than that and I didn't. But I have a real question for you tofu - what do you think of http://eloquentjavascript.net/ ? I kinda wanted to learn js and I learned a bit from that book, it seemed nice to me but I dunno, I'm mostly a C++ programmer tt at first glance it looks fine. It's pretty much guaranteed to be better than w3schools. But I haven't (and don't have time this week) to go through it.
|
For javascript, I found this blog/website pretty to be good.
http://javascriptissexy.com/.
Node.js book/section is a little outdated though. Express framework is on 3.0 now so YMMV.
|
On January 21 2014 11:27 Cyx. wrote:Show nested quote +On January 21 2014 10:18 tofucake wrote: have you tried get out?
w3schools is awful, never use it I was going to inb4 this =D and then I realized I had better things to do with my life than that and I didn't. But I have a real question for you tofu - what do you think of http://eloquentjavascript.net/ ? I kinda wanted to learn js and I learned a bit from that book, it seemed nice to me but I dunno, I'm mostly a C++ programmer tt
I actually learned Javascript from this book, it was pretty good. Other than the book, it's just trying to make things work on my own websites. Now I can say I'm definitely a lot better with JS/jQuery.
|
On January 18 2014 08:14 BigFan wrote:Show nested quote +On January 17 2014 16:05 mcc wrote: I think at some point everybody should make time to learn one functional language. One, many of their aspects are finding their way into imperative languages and are great help if you know how to leverage them. Second, functional languages and TDD mesh pretty well. what's defined as functional language? java? c? c++? Show nested quote +On January 18 2014 04:48 darkness wrote:On January 17 2014 14:52 Ben... wrote: I just view basic Java as C++ with stupid syntax and a bunch of built in crap with even more stupid names. Strangely, I view C++ OOP as Java with stupid syntax.  I don't know why you don't like Java's syntax. It's so easy! I always viewed C as the more superior one  On a more serious note, I think he feels more in control with C++, at least I felt that way as well. Most with C, least with java when I used to program. Sorry did not notice the question. Functional languages are languages like Haskell, Erlang, Lisp,... . Main distinguishing features are declarative programming, no state and no mutable data. Of course there are ways to achieve that, but that is the main "tenet".
Things that are being imported to imperative languages like C++/C#/Java are lambdas, concept of pure functions, pattern matching. Java is probably slowest adopter of those though. In general I could not imagine working without lambdas, that is one of the reasons I considered Java inferior to C# in last years. On language design level at least, of course there are other considerations.
|
On January 22 2014 10:54 mcc wrote:Show nested quote +On January 18 2014 08:14 BigFan wrote:On January 17 2014 16:05 mcc wrote: I think at some point everybody should make time to learn one functional language. One, many of their aspects are finding their way into imperative languages and are great help if you know how to leverage them. Second, functional languages and TDD mesh pretty well. what's defined as functional language? java? c? c++? On January 18 2014 04:48 darkness wrote:On January 17 2014 14:52 Ben... wrote: I just view basic Java as C++ with stupid syntax and a bunch of built in crap with even more stupid names. Strangely, I view C++ OOP as Java with stupid syntax.  I don't know why you don't like Java's syntax. It's so easy! I always viewed C as the more superior one  On a more serious note, I think he feels more in control with C++, at least I felt that way as well. Most with C, least with java when I used to program. Sorry did not notice the question. Functional languages are languages like Haskell, Erlang, Lisp,... . Main distinguishing features are declarative programming, no state and no mutable data. Of course there are ways to achieve that, but that is the main "tenet". Things that are being imported to imperative languages like C++/C#/Java are lambdas, concept of pure functions, pattern matching. Java is probably slowest adopter of those though. In general I could not imagine working without lambdas, that is one of the reasons I considered Java inferior to C# in last years. On language design level at least, of course there are other considerations.
I wish Java didn't have its head stuck so far up its ass that it wouldn't get phased out of existence.
The "experts" that write articles as to why Java shouldn't have certain features are just as retarded.
http://cafe.elharo.com/blogroll/why-java-doesnt-need-properties-it-already-has-them/
Omg Java is going to collapse under its own weight!
No just... no.
|
On January 21 2014 14:40 icystorage wrote: if you're in the software engineering field, should you get a masters? why? when should you get it? Really depends on where your undergrad degree is, and what kind of job you're trying to get (and where you're trying to get a job).
If you have an undergrad degree from a decent-ish US Uni, it is not necessary to get a master's degree, even if you're shooting for top companies.
|
On January 22 2014 11:11 sluggaslamoo wrote:Show nested quote +On January 22 2014 10:54 mcc wrote:On January 18 2014 08:14 BigFan wrote:On January 17 2014 16:05 mcc wrote: I think at some point everybody should make time to learn one functional language. One, many of their aspects are finding their way into imperative languages and are great help if you know how to leverage them. Second, functional languages and TDD mesh pretty well. what's defined as functional language? java? c? c++? On January 18 2014 04:48 darkness wrote:On January 17 2014 14:52 Ben... wrote: I just view basic Java as C++ with stupid syntax and a bunch of built in crap with even more stupid names. Strangely, I view C++ OOP as Java with stupid syntax.  I don't know why you don't like Java's syntax. It's so easy! I always viewed C as the more superior one  On a more serious note, I think he feels more in control with C++, at least I felt that way as well. Most with C, least with java when I used to program. Sorry did not notice the question. Functional languages are languages like Haskell, Erlang, Lisp,... . Main distinguishing features are declarative programming, no state and no mutable data. Of course there are ways to achieve that, but that is the main "tenet". Things that are being imported to imperative languages like C++/C#/Java are lambdas, concept of pure functions, pattern matching. Java is probably slowest adopter of those though. In general I could not imagine working without lambdas, that is one of the reasons I considered Java inferior to C# in last years. On language design level at least, of course there are other considerations. I wish Java didn't have its head stuck so far up its ass that it wouldn't get phased out of existence. The "experts" that write articles as to why Java shouldn't have certain features are just as retarded. http://cafe.elharo.com/blogroll/why-java-doesnt-need-properties-it-already-has-them/Omg Java is going to collapse under its own weight! No just... no.
Wow, that article is... well, it's something alright...
"Let's keep the language worse than the competitors so we don't have to learn more stuff and so the language doesn't become bloated"
Too bad that, due to the Android, Java won't leave in the near future. It's certainly past it's time.
|
On January 23 2014 05:17 Morfildur wrote:Show nested quote +On January 22 2014 11:11 sluggaslamoo wrote:On January 22 2014 10:54 mcc wrote:On January 18 2014 08:14 BigFan wrote:On January 17 2014 16:05 mcc wrote: I think at some point everybody should make time to learn one functional language. One, many of their aspects are finding their way into imperative languages and are great help if you know how to leverage them. Second, functional languages and TDD mesh pretty well. what's defined as functional language? java? c? c++? On January 18 2014 04:48 darkness wrote:On January 17 2014 14:52 Ben... wrote: I just view basic Java as C++ with stupid syntax and a bunch of built in crap with even more stupid names. Strangely, I view C++ OOP as Java with stupid syntax.  I don't know why you don't like Java's syntax. It's so easy! I always viewed C as the more superior one  On a more serious note, I think he feels more in control with C++, at least I felt that way as well. Most with C, least with java when I used to program. Sorry did not notice the question. Functional languages are languages like Haskell, Erlang, Lisp,... . Main distinguishing features are declarative programming, no state and no mutable data. Of course there are ways to achieve that, but that is the main "tenet". Things that are being imported to imperative languages like C++/C#/Java are lambdas, concept of pure functions, pattern matching. Java is probably slowest adopter of those though. In general I could not imagine working without lambdas, that is one of the reasons I considered Java inferior to C# in last years. On language design level at least, of course there are other considerations. I wish Java didn't have its head stuck so far up its ass that it wouldn't get phased out of existence. The "experts" that write articles as to why Java shouldn't have certain features are just as retarded. http://cafe.elharo.com/blogroll/why-java-doesnt-need-properties-it-already-has-them/Omg Java is going to collapse under its own weight! No just... no. Wow, that article is... well, it's something alright... "Let's keep the language worse than the competitors so we don't have to learn more stuff and so the language doesn't become bloated" Too bad that, due to the Android, Java won't leave in the near future. It's certainly past it's time. Well, there's merit to that line of thinking. I know C++ has a lot of fans, especially here, but the language is in many circles considered a blight just because of how bloated it is. Not in speed or memory use, obviously, but in features. It's just a mismash of every paradigm imagineable, which makes the code hard to read and debug and it makes the language far harder to learn and program well.
There's certainly awesome aspects to the flexibility and power it offers, but languages definitely should be restrictive about what they add.
|
I've noticed that GsonBuilder creates a Gson object, so I've checked source code to see if it's indeed the Builder pattern. And yes, it is. However, I wonder why they just don't pass the Builder instance? The build method is like this:
public Gson create() { List<TypeAdapterFactory> factories = new ArrayList<TypeAdapterFactory>(); factories.addAll(this.factories); Collections.reverse(factories); factories.addAll(this.hierarchyFactories); addTypeAdaptersForDate(datePattern, dateStyle, timeStyle, factories);
return new Gson(excluder, fieldNamingPolicy, instanceCreators, serializeNulls, complexMapKeySerialization, generateNonExecutableJson, escapeHtmlChars, prettyPrinting, serializeSpecialFloatingPointValues, longSerializationPolicy, factories); }
So why don't they have additional Gson constructor that just accepts a GsonBuilder instance? Much easier?
|
On January 24 2014 01:49 darkness wrote:I've noticed that GsonBuilder creates a Gson object, so I've checked source code to see if it's indeed the Builder pattern. And yes, it is. However, I wonder why they just don't pass the Builder instance? The build method is like this: public Gson create() { List<TypeAdapterFactory> factories = new ArrayList<TypeAdapterFactory>(); factories.addAll(this.factories); Collections.reverse(factories); factories.addAll(this.hierarchyFactories); addTypeAdaptersForDate(datePattern, dateStyle, timeStyle, factories);
return new Gson(excluder, fieldNamingPolicy, instanceCreators, serializeNulls, complexMapKeySerialization, generateNonExecutableJson, escapeHtmlChars, prettyPrinting, serializeSpecialFloatingPointValues, longSerializationPolicy, factories); }
So why don't they have additional Gson constructor that just accepts a GsonBuilder instance? Much easier?
Both ways would work. The object calling a non-static method is just another argument, referenced with "this".
In the GsonBuilder case, the programmer wants you to use the GsonBuilder to create Gson Objects instead of having a Gson Object using a GsonBuilder Object to create itself. The difference is mainly connotative, as the semantics are the same both ways.
EDIT: It may also be the case that the programmer implemented both ways in order for you to use whichever one makes your program easier to understand. My guess is that the Builder pattern was implemented in order to avoid the long list of arguments for the Gson constructor.
|
|
|
|
|
|