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

31–40 of 62 posts

Re: Jolie, the service-oriented programming language

#31

Post by petesergeant »

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.)

I agree with the sentiment, but this one is just shitty. Switch out the stars for pluses and it’d be a lot better

Re: Jolie, the service-oriented programming language

#32

Post by petesergeant »

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.

> I'm going to sue you for denying service arbitrarily and win

Which country are you claiming this entirely implausible legal scenario would work in?

Re: Jolie, the service-oriented programming language

#33

Post by lolinder »

tsuru93 wrote: post #30

I was kinda forced to use it for an university exam. The premise was interesting but working with it was bad. Maybe it improved in the last 5/6 years, but I doubt it's used for many (or any) real use case.

The vast majority of programming languages would be terrible for production code in a real business setting. We share and discuss them here not because we're looking for something to replace the big few languages at work but because the niche and obscure ones often explore very interesting ideas.

Re: Jolie, the service-oriented programming language

#35

Post by hn_throwaway_99 »

A lot of this looks similar to what GraphQL with something like Apollo Federation gives you:

1. A contract-first language where all of your queries (reads) and mutations (writes) are defined in the GraphQL type language.

2. Refinement types can be implemented with directives or custom scalars.

3. The "built for the networked age" section is very similar to what Apollo Federation gives you - the ability to move implementations of part of your GraphQL API service to different servers with end clients being unaware.

4. Protocol agnositic - technically GraphQL is protocol agnostic but in really nobody cares because everyone uses HTTP or Websockets.

Re: Jolie, the service-oriented programming language

#36

Post by smrtinsert »

Twirrim wrote: post #17
_yb2s wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is an absurdly complex regex

Email address specs turn out to be rather complicated. I really wish people wouldn't code their own checks rather than use already existing standards. Some languages like Java even include proper checks in their standard library: https://java.net/projects/javamail Several jobs back I had no end of arguments with some Java devs about not writing their own checks, that kept routinely failing on legitimate addresses.

It's all devs in general. As a java dev I have lost count of the number of times I have to tell any dev not to use a damn regex to validate emails.

Re: Jolie, the service-oriented programming language

#37

Post by rob74 »

afelixdorn wrote: post #21
stevenae wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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).

I'm pretty sure you've heard of at least one person named Jolie: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angelina_Jolie - but of course she's not French, I guess her parents picked the name because it sounded nice, and she thought it sounded so nice that she picked it as her stage name...

Re: Jolie, the service-oriented programming language

#38

Post by brabel »

_yb2s wrote: post #14
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

That is an absurdly complex regex

It really is, I wonder if anyone has tested that extensively. It's so complex that just by reading it I don't think anyone would be able to confirm it matches the RFC correctly.

Re: Jolie, the service-oriented programming language

#39

Post by mhackaroons »

manlobster wrote: post #25

I think it would be better if this was a code generator similar to `protoc` for gRPC, so we don't have to learn yet another implementation language.

One of the devs here. We plan to release an updated code generator (jolie2java) that will make it easy to do exactly that. (For Java, but Jolie is already designed to support other langs as well in the future.)

Specifically, you'll be able to use Jolie to write (tech-agnostic) APIs and then implement them in Java, using types automatically generated from the Jolie APIs.

Re: Jolie, the service-oriented programming language

#40

Post by [deleted] »

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.)

[deleted]
Post reply on HN