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

Jolie, the service-oriented programming language

jolie-lang.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 62 posts

Re: Jolie, the service-oriented programming language

#21

Post by afelixdorn »

stevenae wrote: post #10
greenthrow wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seems like a backronym to me.

For those who don't know, jolie means pretty in french, and is a common woman's name.

I don't think I've heard heard of someone named Jolie.

According to data from INSEE (France's Census Bureau equivalent), since 1925, only 6 babies were named Jolie in 2011 and then 5 more in 2018.

There's a Joline which you'd pronounce pretty much like jolie as the n is very weak, but it's barely more popular.

Anyway, jolie does mean pretty, but it's not really a name (11~0 at this scale).

Re: Jolie, the service-oriented programming language

#22

Post by immibis »

IncreasePosts wrote: post #19
xonix wrote: post #12

email:string( regex(".*@.*\\..*") ) This is incorrect regex for email. The correct one is https://pdw.ex-parrot.com/Mail-RFC822-Address.html

At a certain point I think you're allowed to say you don't care if the person with this email address is capable of signing up or using your service: very.”(),:; []”.VERY.”very@\\ "very”.unusual@strange.example.com

Too bad - if that's my email address and you're rejecting it, I'm going to sue you for denying service arbitrarily and win. Not every country is the USA.

Re: Jolie, the service-oriented programming language

#23

Post by wk_end »

immibis wrote: post #22
IncreasePosts wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At a certain point I think you're allowed to say you don't care if the person with this email address is capable of signing up or using your service: very.”(),:; []”.VERY.”very@\\ "very”.unusual@strange.example.com

Too bad - if that's my email address and you're rejecting it, I'm going to sue you for denying service arbitrarily and win. Not every country is the USA.

Is there a country where this has happened?

Re: Jolie, the service-oriented programming language

#24

Post by boulos »

OJFord wrote: post #18
xonix wrote: post #12

email:string( regex(".*@.*\\..*") ) This is incorrect regex for email. The correct one is https://pdw.ex-parrot.com/Mail-RFC822-Address.html

It's a pragmatic one. It has no false negatives, and there's rarely a reason to care about false positives. (Especially not where a stricter regex would (be the only mechanism to) catch it, but a fake-but-valid address wouldn't trivially bypass it.)

At the very least, I assume .+ at the start is a better choice.

The RFC says:

     addr-spec   =  local-part "@" domain        ; global address
     atom        =  1*
     word        =  atom / quoted-string
so I think the bit in front of the @ has to be non-empty.

Re: Jolie, the service-oriented programming language

#26

Post by Touche »

immibis wrote: post #22
IncreasePosts wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At a certain point I think you're allowed to say you don't care if the person with this email address is capable of signing up or using your service: very.”(),:; []”.VERY.”very@\\ "very”.unusual@strange.example.com

Too bad - if that's my email address and you're rejecting it, I'm going to sue you for denying service arbitrarily and win. Not every country is the USA.

[flagged]

Re: Jolie, the service-oriented programming language

#27

Post by DEADMINCE »

immibis wrote: post #22
IncreasePosts wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At a certain point I think you're allowed to say you don't care if the person with this email address is capable of signing up or using your service: very.”(),:; []”.VERY.”very@\\ "very”.unusual@strange.example.com

Too bad - if that's my email address and you're rejecting it, I'm going to sue you for denying service arbitrarily and win. Not every country is the USA.

The denial of service was not intentional so I doubt you would win anything.

Re: Jolie, the service-oriented programming language

#29

Post by naasking »

croemer wrote: post #13
naasking wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe it's just a bad example, it doesn't look much different than what I can do in C#.

Why would you showcase a bad example if there was a better one?

What I meant is, not every language is better at every problem. It's maybe a bad example to showcase Jolie's strengths.
Post reply on HN