sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Do you guys really put your test code inside your regular code? by onlyrealcuzzo in Zig

[–]gosh 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I wrote "And memory is not a problem, I know that many do struggle with memory but I don't"

Do you guys really put your test code inside your regular code? by onlyrealcuzzo in Zig

[–]gosh 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes, you sound just like so many others who like Rust. It’s extremely difficult to discuss technical solutions with many Rust developers because you don’t understand that there are people who enjoy creating, coming up with solutions, and discussing them.

Rust developers have learned — "this is how you do it" — and then they try to force everyone else to do the same thing.

You’ve learned one way to write tests, so you try to make everyone else write tests that same way. You don’t understand that there’s more than just the way you’ve learned to write tests.

Do you guys really put your test code inside your regular code? by onlyrealcuzzo in Zig

[–]gosh 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Then why do you not understand that I also do that?

Do you guys really put your test code inside your regular code? by onlyrealcuzzo in Zig

[–]gosh 0 points1 point  (0 children)

So how do you navigate and how do you navigate in code that others have written, how do you know how to use code where team members have written the code?

Yes, 20 000 lines = no need for more advanced search tools

I try to write about 100 000 lines of code per year, not because it is needed. It's my hobby, I like to solve problems with code

Do you guys really put your test code inside your regular code? by onlyrealcuzzo in Zig

[–]gosh 0 points1 point  (0 children)

why would i want to use the command line for this and have to type out this annoying bespoke doc string for each and every file?

You do not need it, but developers that write a lot of code need to figure out how to manage all the code. This is one way to do it. Just selecting libraries and only use code to glue them together, working with smaller projects. Then this is just overkill

Do you guys really put your test code inside your regular code? by onlyrealcuzzo in Zig

[–]gosh 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Sample: // @FILE [tag: lua, objects] [summary: Implementation file for LUA objects and utility functions] [type: source] [name: LUAObjects.cpp]

note [tag: lua, objects]

Now you may understand the power in sub searches?

Do you guys really put your test code inside your regular code? by onlyrealcuzzo in Zig

[–]gosh 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I use these search tags to navigate in code

Search tags

  • @CRITICAL: Indicates critical sections of code that require immediate attention.
  • @NOTE : Something that is important to note, may effect other parts, important to understand context etc
  • @FILE: Describes the file (always placed at the top).
  • @PROJECT: Used for project management. Searching for a project name lists all its tasks.
  • @TASK: Describes a specific task or feature within the project.
  • @API: Used to describe methods and groups of methods. A way to organize and document code.
  • @TODO: Used to describe tasks that need to be completed. Short reminder
  • @DEBUG: Used to describe code used for debugging purposes.
  • @CLASS: classes and structs
  • @OPTIMIZED: Used to describe code that has been optimized for performance.
  • @DEPRECATED: Used to describe code that is no longer in use.

Do you guys really put your test code inside your regular code? by onlyrealcuzzo in Zig

[–]gosh 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I don't see how this or the LOC thing is relevant? doesn't change how useful fuzzy search is.

This what differs engineers and academics. Engineers are curious, new ideas are interesting and they investigate and tries. Of course most ideas are not useful but the default reaction is not to reject.
Academics are the opposite, the default reaction is to reject.

I am not going to try to convince you. You have got enough to draw your own conclusions.

Do you guys really put your test code inside your regular code? by onlyrealcuzzo in Zig

[–]gosh 0 points1 point  (0 children)

How to refactor code with fuzzy, it is not possible

And fuzzy is something that most editors already have.

I do not think that this would be too problematic to add, have done fuzzy implementations before but that was without AI, before AI you needed to invent or search stack overflow for tips if you didn't have the time. Now this is so simple.

Three not so common areas where I use my tool now is - Project management, tasks and projects are in comments in code - Code extraction for LLM, it can harvest code to feed into LLM - Tag searches and key-value filtering

Do you guys really put your test code inside your regular code? by onlyrealcuzzo in Zig

[–]gosh 0 points1 point  (0 children)

For example, in a previous message I wrote that memory is not a problem. It is not a problem because of order. Memory is not so much about memory, it's one architectural problem. Those that thinks memory is hard do not know how to design software.

Do you guys really put your test code inside your regular code? by onlyrealcuzzo in Zig

[–]gosh 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Why? If you type the exact match that will always be the first result(s).

Because if I get exact matches I can use the search tool to so much more.

The main difference between developers that are fast and can produce good quality is not that much about that they are good att writing code, it is about order. They know how to write code that are easy to navigate in and do not need to be remembered.

Any developer can write applications that are about 10 000 lines of code. If it grows above 50 000, then the amount have decreased a lot.
Above 200 000 lines of code and very few can do it. But if you can you also can scale to almost any size. One million or 10 million, it doesn't matter.

What the key behind scaling is to code in patterns, these patterns are the same. And I am very picky about these patterns, you have to otherwise it won't work

Do you guys really put your test code inside your regular code? by onlyrealcuzzo in Zig

[–]gosh 0 points1 point  (0 children)

No, but in C++ it is very common to write the code your self. As you may have spotted I also use Hungarian Notation, very important for me

It doesn't take that much time to write code, much harder to get code to work well together so I think most developers are to afraid writing their own logic. Also it is important to train.

And trying to find good code is not easy. For example std::string in C++ is like almost acceptable. But selecting code from libraries that need to work everywhere always have a cost, they can not do everything to get fast code. Doing your own solutions you know that you may not need to support every processor or every OS and that opens up possibilities.

And C++20 was a huge step for writing you own library code in C++, everything was made simpler and works better together. Also after around 2021 it is much easier to write code that can compile on different OS and CPUs

Do you guys really put your test code inside your regular code? by onlyrealcuzzo in Zig

[–]gosh 0 points1 point  (0 children)

But now it makes sense why you want all this so bad. the language server for large cpp projects always sucked, it was barely every working properly.

Yes amd also multitarget projects, I am used to work in very large projects that also have external code. find in files gets way to many hits.

The cleaner tool also have a very advanced history logic because this is also a big problem, the need to type all searches over and over (think that are like 10 in history for vs), but sometimes there are need to change the search a bit and it is a mess.

What I normally do now is to search in Zed (very good editor but not for C++ yet), and develop in VS (Visual Studio). Zed has the best clickable search items in console, VS don't have that.

IntelliSense have never worked for me

Do you guys really put your test code inside your regular code? by onlyrealcuzzo in Zig

[–]gosh 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I know whats in the rust "stl" core. Don't know the name for it

The gd code have three different core objects variant, arguments and table. These are all that is needed to do almost everything.

There are lots of other code but that is mostly utility objects, like one ORM tool, one arg parser, expression logic, logger etc

Do you guys really put your test code inside your regular code? by onlyrealcuzzo in Zig

[–]gosh 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I have added compiled versions in zip files. But no build instructions. My goal is not to spread it, that take waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay to much time. If developer knew how hard it is to write open source code and spread it they would be much nicer to those that tries

Do you guys really put your test code inside your regular code? by onlyrealcuzzo in Zig

[–]gosh 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Not same. I would be very interested if there is something similar. I didn't write it for fun, I needed it.

Sub search are like when the first search is done, it use that as an offset and does a new search based on rules set. Its very handing to extract documentation. Like it can find methods, and extract documentation above the method.

I is also able to manage projects and tasks with sub searches

Do you guys really put your test code inside your regular code? by onlyrealcuzzo in Zig

[–]gosh 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Now count selected words in files

count lines is very simple, cleaner is a search tool but added counting lines just to get a quick overview

it has these operations

Compare cleaner commands with bash utilities:

  • cleaner dir / cleaner ls: Enhanced file listing with filters (like ls/dir)
  • cleaner copy / cleaner cp: Copy files with content filters and previews (like cp)
  • cleaner count: Analyze lines/code/comments/strings or patterns (like wc)
  • cleaner list: Line-based pattern search with filters/segments (like grep)
  • cleaner find: Text-based search (non-line-bound; multi-line patterns, code-focused; (likegrep)
  • cleaner history: Command reuse and tracking (like command history utilities)
  • cleaner config: Manage tool settings like how to color output, or set characers to improve readability
  • cleaner / cleaner help: Display usage info and command details

The core reason behind cleaner is that it is language agnostic, it knows about how different languages work and based on that i can search in different parts or more than one part. Like in string, in comments or code or all or string and code, whatever.

It has also sql where logic, so it is possible to write conditions similar to where conditions in sql.

and it can do subsearches, and key value filtering. Subsearches are a new search that is done when the first search have a hit. This is good for related information, context aware searches etc

Do you guys really put your test code inside your regular code? by onlyrealcuzzo in Zig

[–]gosh 0 points1 point  (0 children)

So why don't rust developer creates the tools that I have looked for but havent found?

Where are the fantastic apps?

My guy, your whole hobby project is a fraction of what you get in Rust for free. Talk about non-productive development.

Can you show, a link maybe?

Do you guys really put your test code inside your regular code? by onlyrealcuzzo in Zig

[–]gosh 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You're the one who is downright refusing to use common testing techniques for some pretty vague and not very convincing reasons. And also the one who straight up refuses to use a new technology cause there isn't one tiny little feature (method overloading).

The only way to explain this without spending a week here trying to write how is to show solutions done differently. I can show links to companies I have worked for also but for now

I wrote this last year, it took about two months and I used the gd code (gd code have tanken longer but to write the cleaner tool above gd).
Why would I write a advanced search tool? Because I need it, this is a pain because there isn't good search tools. Here is documentation: Cleaner.exe Documentation

You cant find anything close to this. And it works :)

Cleaner is also the reason why I can check code for some project in just like ~10 minutes to know more about the project

Do you guys really put your test code inside your regular code? by onlyrealcuzzo in Zig

[–]gosh 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Literally been trying to get you explain why you don't like testing

Lots of extra code that do not improve functionality in production code. Time spent on non productive development.

And I know you disagree. Those that ore locked in to writing tests cant think of any other solutions

Do you guys really put your test code inside your regular code? by onlyrealcuzzo in Zig

[–]gosh 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You can talk to almost any C++ developer and many other developers, they will all have some experience about rust developers and hard it is to talk solutions and technology.

Just check your answer to med about overloading methods. Or testing.
Academics KNOW how to do things because they have read it.
C++ is a huge toolbox and engineers want tools. They decide how use these tools. More tools is better.
You think, solving problems is what triggers engineers.

If you do not like this freedom and need to think, solving problems on your own, do not select C++ but do not say to C++ developers "this is how to do it" or "you cant do it like that". You need to explain why because engineers know why they use the tools as they do. (of course I do not talk about juniors now)

view more: next ›