July 05, 2012
On 7/5/12 12:26 PM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
> Check this out: on http://dlang.org you can actually click in the code
> example and edit it, then click "Run" and pronto, you see the output!
>
> Damian is actively working on the UI as I'm writing this. Feel free to
> chime in with feedback!

Updated to a much nicer shape. http://dlang.org. Thanks Damian! He'll work soon on enabling such compilation for all code examples in the Phobos pages.

Andrei


July 05, 2012
On Thursday, 5 July 2012 at 16:59:33 UTC, Iain Buclaw wrote:
> On 5 July 2012 17:51, H. S. Teoh <hsteoh@quickfur.ath.cx> wrote:
>> On Thu, Jul 05, 2012 at 12:26:01PM -0400, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
>>> Check this out: on http://dlang.org you can actually click in the code
>>> example and edit it, then click "Run" and pronto, you see the output!
>>>
>>> Damian is actively working on the UI as I'm writing this. Feel free to
>>> chime in with feedback!
>> [...]
>>
>> Won't that be open to abuse? Like if somebody wrote a fork bomb and
>> tried to run it...
>>
>> Unless the backend server has tight resource control over the code
>> sample executor, of course
>>
>
> If it's using the same engine as dpaste ( http://dpaste.dzfl.pl ),
> then it is fairly locked down.

Yea, its using dpaste backend :~)

July 05, 2012
On Thursday, 5 July 2012 at 19:10:57 UTC, Peter Alexander wrote:
> Nice.
>
> Should probably remove the references to local files when compilation fails. Not very user friendly to see:
>
> /home/jail/compileme369.d(14): expression expected, not '}'
>
> Would probably suffice just to switch the filename with something less distracting.

Partially fixed.
Thanks!
July 05, 2012
On Thursday, 5 July 2012 at 17:56:34 UTC, Dmitry Olshansky wrote:
> On 05-Jul-12 20:26, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
>> Check this out: on http://dlang.org you can actually click in the code
>> example and edit it, then click "Run" and pronto, you see the output!
>>
>> Damian is actively working on the UI as I'm writing this. Feel free to
>> chime in with feedback!
>>
>>
>
> Wonderful! It's fast and fluid, looks good.
>
> Still I would request adding interactive console input.
>
> Some magic with WebSockets & some server daemon on worker machines should do the trick. And being able to run for some time if network client is active.
>
> Browsers without WebSockets can just use non-interactive input with some text area which contents are fed to the program.

That would be really nice, but I am afraid it's currently not doable with current design of whole infrastructure. Although I will think about it, dpaste probably could benefit from this too.
July 05, 2012
On 06-Jul-12 01:28, nazriel wrote:
> On Thursday, 5 July 2012 at 17:56:34 UTC, Dmitry Olshansky wrote:
>> On 05-Jul-12 20:26, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
>>> Check this out: on http://dlang.org you can actually click in the code
>>> example and edit it, then click "Run" and pronto, you see the output!
>>>
>>> Damian is actively working on the UI as I'm writing this. Feel free to
>>> chime in with feedback!
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Wonderful! It's fast and fluid, looks good.
>>
>> Still I would request adding interactive console input.
>>
>> Some magic with WebSockets & some server daemon on worker machines
>> should do the trick. And being able to run for some time if network
>> client is active.
>>
>> Browsers without WebSockets can just use non-interactive input with
>> some text area which contents are fed to the program.
>
> That would be really nice, but I am afraid it's currently not doable
> with current design of whole infrastructure. Although I will think about
> it, dpaste probably could benefit from this too.

The truth be told I'd love to get this kind of infrastructure for a personal use. I've seen firsthand Claud9 IDE with node.js working on a very tiny device and, of course, I got jealous.
I thought: such a waste of cycles, it would be so much better if it was D running on it :)

-- 
Dmitry Olshansky


July 06, 2012
On Thu, 05 Jul 2012 12:26:01 -0400
Andrei Alexandrescu <SeeWebsiteForEmail@erdani.org> wrote:

> Check this out: on http://dlang.org you can actually click in the code example and edit it, then click "Run" and pronto, you see the output!
> 
> Damian is actively working on the UI as I'm writing this. Feel free to chime in with feedback!
> 
> 
> Andrei

It looks nice, but do we really need to be pulling in a giant JS-bomb like JQuery on D's homepage?

July 06, 2012
On Friday, 6 July 2012 at 05:45:25 UTC, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
> On Thu, 05 Jul 2012 12:26:01 -0400
> Andrei Alexandrescu <SeeWebsiteForEmail@erdani.org> wrote:
>
>> Check this out: on http://dlang.org you can actually click in the
>> code example and edit it, then click "Run" and pronto, you see the
>> output!
>> 
>> Damian is actively working on the UI as I'm writing this. Feel free
>> to chime in with feedback!
>> 
>> 
>> Andrei
>
> It looks nice, but do we really need to be pulling in a giant JS-bomb
> like JQuery on D's homepage?

If you have JS enabled, you will hit JQuery on a large portion of
modern web-pages. It looks like it degrades gracefully when JS is
disabled, so I don't really see the problem.

If you want to suggest specific solutions (why are you doing X
with JQuery? Isn't doing Y sufficient?) that would be useful,
otherwise everyone is just going to filter you out as "old man
nick is complaining about JS again" :)

July 06, 2012
On 7/5/2012 11:06 PM, Bernard Helyer wrote:
> otherwise everyone is just going to filter you out as "old man
> nick is complaining about JS again" :)

Young whippersnappers with your fancy cell phones and color monitors! Why, in my day we had ASR-33 teletypes at 10 characters per second, and we were blessed!


July 06, 2012
On Friday, 6 July 2012 at 05:45:25 UTC, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
> On Thu, 05 Jul 2012 12:26:01 -0400
> Andrei Alexandrescu <SeeWebsiteForEmail@erdani.org> wrote:
>
>> Check this out: on http://dlang.org you can actually click in the
>> code example and edit it, then click "Run" and pronto, you see the
>> output!
>> 
>> Damian is actively working on the UI as I'm writing this. Feel free
>> to chime in with feedback!
>> 
>> 
>> Andrei
>
> It looks nice, but do we really need to be pulling in a giant JS-bomb
> like JQuery on D's homepage?

It's same question like
Why use binary bomb like D instead of using C?

Using jQuery, despite rapid development I gain one, very important thing. It's well tested framework and I don't need to care about IE glitches and use hacks to support all browsers.

I respect your state about JavaScript, but please, lets not make in another "X language sux" thread. D community is already full of this comparing crap including "D sux, Lua rox" statements :P Work needs to be done.

Of course I am open for suggestions and have will to replace jQuery with any same good and scale-able solution but more lightweight.

Best regards,
Damian Ziemba
July 06, 2012
On Friday, 6 July 2012 at 06:06:28 UTC, Bernard Helyer wrote:
> On Friday, 6 July 2012 at 05:45:25 UTC, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
>> On Thu, 05 Jul 2012 12:26:01 -0400
>> Andrei Alexandrescu <SeeWebsiteForEmail@erdani.org> wrote:
>>
>>> Check this out: on http://dlang.org you can actually click in the
>>> code example and edit it, then click "Run" and pronto, you see the
>>> output!
>>> 
>>> Damian is actively working on the UI as I'm writing this. Feel free
>>> to chime in with feedback!
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Andrei
>>
>> It looks nice, but do we really need to be pulling in a giant JS-bomb
>> like JQuery on D's homepage?
>
> If you have JS enabled, you will hit JQuery on a large portion of
> modern web-pages. It looks like it degrades gracefully when JS is
> disabled, so I don't really see the problem.
>
To be honest I really kept Nick in my head while working on no-javascript fallback. No joke, really. I remember his statements about JS and I really took it to heart :)

It should give ol' good dlang.org site when running without JS.
When everything will settle down and hit stable state, we will also compress all js files (jQuery is already shipped compressed) so loading times shouldn't be an issue. I believe there are not much 56kbps modem users this days anyways! *grins*

> If you want to suggest specific solutions (why are you doing X
> with JQuery? Isn't doing Y sufficient?) that would be useful,
> otherwise everyone is just going to filter you out as "old man
> nick is complaining about JS again" :)
Nick is right, JS is way overused these days and it's wrong, but sometimes it is a must. And yes please, any suggestions are welcome!