Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Google DNS at 010.010.010.010

8.8.8.8

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 132 posts

Re: Google DNS at 010.010.010.010

#121

Post by heavenlyblue »

hn_throwaway_69 wrote: post #100
keymone wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Doesn’t this just highlight that php development ecosystem doesn’t value quality much? What even is a “file” in context of a web request? What about dependencies or logic defined in other files? This is just bizarre, I can’t see a sane codebase where this would be preferable to going on GitHub and pressing “.”

On the contrary, doesn't it highlight that the PHP development ecosystem values simplicity? That is, a simple application (which this is) can be contained within one file, rather than something requiring several folders, dependencies, and an 'init' command? I don't understand your criticism and I suggest you might not either.

You replace your “init” command with some VIMming of your nginx configuration.

The next on the line is that PHP doesn’t even need anything like version control because you can just copy files over SFTP.

PS: if your project is simple enough to fit in a single file I would argue that most of the time you may use absolutely anything (including a Google Sheet) and you would be equally happy with the results.

Re: Google DNS at 010.010.010.010

#122

Post by floatingatoll »

broodbucket wrote: post #112
floatingatoll wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Octal is a great way to mislead both human beings and software, and I kind of hope it gets removed by browsers as a result of this new attention. It’s one of those things that isn’t productive or useful in any way in our modern era and serves only to complicate with no benefit in return.

Probably useless in the browser, but who uses octal in general? I assume it's still important in some areas (networking?) but I don't actually know. Only thing I can think of personally is UNIX file permissions.

I would refuse any PR that used octal unnecessarily, and I generally ask people to use chmod plus-addressing rather than octal where possible, so that there’s a lower risk of math errors and a higher chance of good review.

0644|0755: a=rX,u+w

0600: u=rw

Etc.

Re: Google DNS at 010.010.010.010

#123

Post by [deleted] »

keymone wrote: post #113
hn_throwaway_69 wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On the contrary, doesn't it highlight that the PHP development ecosystem values simplicity? That is, a simple application (which this is) can be contained within one file, rather than something requiring several folders, dependencies, and an 'init' command? I don't understand your criticism and I suggest you might not either.

The irony of thinking files and folders are too much for simple app and also praising a feature that is in direct relation to php’s MO of conflating codebase folder structure with requests’ path. Edit: this reminds me, I was like this too at the beginning of my dev career, I also was completely in favor of this supposed “simplicity” of php, only much later, thanks to hickey’s nice talk I realized that I was confusing…

[deleted]

Re: Google DNS at 010.010.010.010

#124

Post by broodbucket »

floatingatoll wrote: post #122
broodbucket wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Probably useless in the browser, but who uses octal in general? I assume it's still important in some areas (networking?) but I don't actually know. Only thing I can think of personally is UNIX file permissions.

I would refuse any PR that used octal unnecessarily, and I generally ask people to use chmod plus-addressing rather than octal where possible, so that there’s a lower risk of math errors and a higher chance of good review. 0644|0755: a=rX,u+w 0600: u=rw Etc.

This is funny for me to read because I converted a bunch of constants for file permissions to octal values in the Linux kernel because they're harder to read and there's multiple ways of arriving at the same value.

You wanna look up what a constant is and you find

    #define S_IRUGO  (S_IRUSR|S_IRGRP|S_IROTH)
or you could see 0444 and immediately know what it means.

I agree in cases where you're modifying existing permissions it's much better to do a `chmod u+w` than to replace the whole thing with octal. When you're defining permissions at the time of creation though, everyone can parse 0644 at a glance.

a=rX,u+w isn't so bad but I don't know if I'd prefer it personally, in code where you can't use chmod syntax I'm definitely preferring octal.

Re: Google DNS at 010.010.010.010

#125

Post by hn_throwaway_69 »

keymone wrote: post #113
hn_throwaway_69 wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On the contrary, doesn't it highlight that the PHP development ecosystem values simplicity? That is, a simple application (which this is) can be contained within one file, rather than something requiring several folders, dependencies, and an 'init' command? I don't understand your criticism and I suggest you might not either.

The irony of thinking files and folders are too much for simple app and also praising a feature that is in direct relation to php’s MO of conflating codebase folder structure with requests’ path. Edit: this reminds me, I was like this too at the beginning of my dev career, I also was completely in favor of this supposed “simplicity” of php, only much later, thanks to hickey’s nice talk I realized that I was confusing…

Sorry, I don't understand your first point, even after reading it several times. I think I might have inferred what you meant by looking at the second (edited in) point, but I'm not sure.

Are you suggesting that it is bad that PHP applications often have a request path that relates to the folder structure?

In other words, are you suggesting that simplicity means an application should not have a request path that relates to the folder structure?

To give an example, are you saying it's a bad thing that example.com/profile/ loads /profile/index.php, rather than passing /profile through a single controller function to identify what code should be responsible for handling it?

The first approach actually seems pretty straightforward paradigm and it's what most new programmers would expect. Adopting a MVC/routes method is more complex and arguably overkill for a simple application.

If that is what you are contending, it should be said that PHP does not require this approach. Although it is often a preferred approach, because it doesn't depend on additional web server configuration.

Re: Google DNS at 010.010.010.010

#126

Post by keymone »

hn_throwaway_69 wrote: post #125
keymone wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The irony of thinking files and folders are too much for simple app and also praising a feature that is in direct relation to php’s MO of conflating codebase folder structure with requests’ path. Edit: this reminds me, I was like this too at the beginning of my dev career, I also was completely in favor of this supposed “simplicity” of php, only much later, thanks to hickey’s nice talk I realized that I was confusing…

Sorry, I don't understand your first point, even after reading it several times. I think I might have inferred what you meant by looking at the second (edited in) point, but I'm not sure. Are you suggesting that it is bad that PHP applications often have a request path that relates to the folder structure? In other words, are you suggesting that simplicity means an application should not have a request path that rela…

I’m not suggesting, I’m saying that conflation is mother of confusion. Conflating request path with file path is not a great idea, especially for new developers that get a mental model of how web apps work that is completely irrelevant for the rest of their careers.

Re: Google DNS at 010.010.010.010

#127

Post by hn_throwaway_69 »

keymone wrote: post #126
hn_throwaway_69 wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sorry, I don't understand your first point, even after reading it several times. I think I might have inferred what you meant by looking at the second (edited in) point, but I'm not sure. Are you suggesting that it is bad that PHP applications often have a request path that relates to the folder structure? In other words, are you suggesting that simplicity means an application should not have a request path that rela…

I’m not suggesting, I’m saying that conflation is mother of confusion. Conflating request path with file path is not a great idea, especially for new developers that get a mental model of how web apps work that is completely irrelevant for the rest of their careers.

There's plenty of large PHP projects that adopt this paradigm. Is it really fair to say it will be completely irrelevant for the rest of their careers?

Also, let's not lose sight that this arises in a context of criticism of the model adopted for programming a simple form. This is just a simple one page form. More complex or abstract paradigms or design patterns is overkill.

Re: Google DNS at 010.010.010.010

#128

Post by floatingatoll »

broodbucket wrote: post #124
floatingatoll wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would refuse any PR that used octal unnecessarily, and I generally ask people to use chmod plus-addressing rather than octal where possible, so that there’s a lower risk of math errors and a higher chance of good review. 0644|0755: a=rX,u+w 0600: u=rw Etc.

This is funny for me to read because I converted a bunch of constants for file permissions to octal values in the Linux kernel because they're harder to read and there's multiple ways of arriving at the same value. You wanna look up what a constant is and you find #define S_IRUGO (S_IRUSR|S_IRGRP|S_IROTH) or you could see 0444 and immediately know what it means. I agree in cases where you're modifying existing permis…

How do you represent a=rX in octal?

Re: Google DNS at 010.010.010.010

#129

Post by pxc »

fragmede wrote: post #49
pxc wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is that a real TLD?

Without getting into the existential question of what does it mean to be real , yes [0]. It's one of the sponsored modern TLDs[1], along with the likes of .horse, .cat (not what you think), .wiki, .club, etc. [0] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/.google [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sponsored_top-level_domain

> Without getting into the existential question of what does it mean to be real

I think what I meant was mostly

> will all or most DNS servers other than Google's resolve .google addresses

I didn't realize Google had bought their own TLD.

I'm not sure how I feel about the sponsored TLDs. I think I like them, mostly. I think I don't love how .google is centered on a single corporation in the same way that I don't like how .gov and .mil have always been so US-centric.

In a way it feels like an intrusion, or somehow misplaced

Re: Google DNS at 010.010.010.010

#130

Post by yurishimo »

keymone wrote: post #119
yurishimo wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Laravel, or any Symphony based framework is a great choice. PHP is a very modern and mature language at this point. If the first thing you think of is Wordpress, then you’re behind.

And how relevant do you think highlight_file is for symphony or laravel?

Probably none.
Post reply on HN