Wedge

Public area => Off-topic => The Pub => Other software => Topic started by: Arantor on September 21st, 2011, 01:15 AM

Title: More thoughts on SMF 2.1
Post by: Arantor on September 21st, 2011, 01:15 AM
So, someone pointed me at http://www.simplemachines.org/community/index.php?topic=453157.0 - it's not even officially by a current team member and yet it's still the closest thing to a guide for 2.1 that anyone outside the team has.

Funny, it's almost as if he read through Wedge's feature list, you know.

I mean:
* Database Support
* Browser Support
* CSS3 & jQuery Implementation
* Bloated Profile Fields

These are things we've actually done already in Wedge, almost word for word.

Then the other stuff that is listed is stuff that has been talked about here, and it seems there is a lot of common ground there, you know, almost as if he'd been reading the forum...

Though I think he's talking out of his ass with PDO. While, yes, PDO does offer some things, sanitisation isn't exactly one of them (though, there is a valid argument to be made that prepared statements can deal with it for the most part), moving it to use PDO "just because" isn't really a good idea - and less hosts have PDO installed. There is an argment for making it an object, which we did, and are likely to expand on in the future.

I take exception, however, to:
Quote
but this can be figured out with PHP very easily, with no need to declare each column.
I'm assuming that he's referring to the db_insert stuff where you have to state the column type. Unfortunately for him, he's actually wrong on at least two counts where it can't be determined safely by PHP, though I will admit both cases are fairly rare.[1][2]

That, and the fact that you do actually have to state the list of columns you're inserting anyway, unless you're inserting an exact row into the table with all values added, and all columns in the exact same order.


Last but not least, I can't see them ever adding ReCaptcha, not least because that's a third party service and they don't use third party services (ever) in the core, but that it's unreliable at very best. I prefer our CAPTCHA, in all honesty, and I'm not saying that because I wrote it.
Posted: September 21st, 2011, 01:11 AM

Also if you want a laugh, they have a new board dedicated to discussion of what's in the next version. Took them long enough.

Mind you, there's still some absolute gems such as http://www.simplemachines.org/community/index.php?topic=375491.msg3165582#msg3165582 - if he thinks it's that simple, I'd love to see him write it.
 1. They are bigint and set/enum cases where the individual values are numeric. In the former case, PHP may munge the data if it's bigger than 2^52 and on a 32 bit setup, and in the latter, if provided as numeric it won't encapsulate the data and will likely cause a query error. In both cases, the data should be sent in quotes, you know, using the string type. Been there, done that.
 2. Mind you, if it were to assume that everything was a string instead and *always* quote everything in the SQL, which is perfectly valid in MySQL even for integers (which it isn't in other DB systems, which is why it's done the way it's done), you could skip specifying both, and just pass everything to the quote function, but that does have a slight performance implication on things that insert a lot of numbers, which is more common than you'd think.
Title: Re: More thoughts on SMF 2.1
Post by: Nao on September 21st, 2011, 11:59 AM
http://blogs.simplemachines.org/dev/453146/Next+SMF+Discussion
http://www.simplemachines.org/community/index.php?board=228.0

I think it's all related..?

Haven't read these. Or your post, actually. Bit... busy.
Title: Re: More thoughts on SMF 2.1
Post by: Nightwish on September 21st, 2011, 12:02 PM
Quote from Arantor on September 21st, 2011, 01:15 AM
I mean:
* Database Support
* Browser Support
* CSS3 & jQuery Implementation
* Bloated Profile Fields

These are things we've actually done already in Wedge, almost word for word.
It's also very close to my list of things some of which I've already done, others are planned. Interesting that I just have wiped the dedicated IM fields and the spell checker a couple of days ago...

However, I see this as a natural development. It's most likely because the known defects and shortcomings of SMF 2 are very well known by many. If a developer with some experience with modern web apps sits down to think about what's wrong by design and what needs to be fixed, most of us will come to more or less identical conclusions.

One of them is that SMF 2 shows its age, everyone can see this at the first glance. It looks old and nowhere close to a modern web application and it is pretty much stuck in the age of first (or second) generation forums like vB 3, phpBB, myBB and others.
Quote
Though I think he's talking out of his ass with PDO. While, yes, PDO does offer some things, sanitisation isn't exactly one of them (though, there is a valid argument to be made that prepared statements can deal with it for the most part), moving it to use PDO "just because" isn't really a good idea - and less hosts have PDO installed. There is an argment for making it an object, which we did, and are likely to expand on in the future.
Imho, PDO doesn't make much sense if you go mysql-only (which is what he proposes). PDO is fine, but it comes with some overhead and unless you need real db abstraction for supporting different database backends, it's bloat, period. For mysql-only I would rather go mysqlI or use a custom implementation for prepared queries (which is what we already have).
Title: Re: More thoughts on SMF 2.1
Post by: Arantor on September 21st, 2011, 12:05 PM
It might be related, I certainly commented on things. But when I see someone whose skills are still pretty raw[1] proclaiming how easy something is, I really begin to despair.
Quote
It's also very close to my list of things some of which I've already done, others are planned. Interesting that I just have wiped the dedicated IM fields and the spell checker a couple of days ago...
Some of them are absolutely natural, some of them are suspiciously close to what we've talked about here though.
Quote
Imho, PDO doesn't make much sense if you go mysql-only (which is what he proposes).
*nods* That's really why it was never much of an option for me. I'd rather go with ADODB as a connector before I touch PDO, though, because PDO doesn't rewrite queries to suit different DB engines.
 1. Even if he has come a very, very long way since a year ago, when he couldn't even come up with a DB query by himself.
Title: Re: More thoughts on SMF 2.1
Post by: Cassiel on September 21st, 2011, 06:08 PM
Quote from Arantor on September 21st, 2011, 12:05 PM
Some of them are absolutely natural, some of them are suspiciously close to what we've talked about here though.
It doesn't really matter if they are or not in the end. It's one thing to put together a list of things you want, it's another matter entirely to be able to actually implement them and implement them well.
Title: Re: More thoughts on SMF 2.1
Post by: Arantor on September 21st, 2011, 06:11 PM
That is very, very true. I await with anticipation to see how we both turn out going forwards.
Title: Re: More thoughts on SMF 2.1
Post by: Nao on August 17th, 2012, 11:23 PM
So... Today I was bored, and while spending time reinstalling my music library on my iPod (I'm faaaar from being finished, to think that I could have just kept the backup I made earlier today! >_<), I also installed SMF 2.1 for the first time on my computer...

Well, it seems (from what I see in the changelogs) that they replaced the default theme with Penguin this week, so I was right on time or something.
And it's looking pretty good. Not Wedge-good I'm afraid, but good enough that there are a couple of details I might as well steal from them (the conveniently located Unread links for boards perhaps, the fine yet still sober buttons which really make me think I should reuse my own button stylings for topic buttons), and good enough that I'm amused (rather than upset) that they took ideas from Wedge... Again ;)
Among more minor things, the more noticeable is that they now use a mini-menu for post actions, just like Wedge.

I just have to ask though... What is it with everyone going for Segoe UI these days? I'm actually considering just staying with Arial 14px because there are so many Segoe UI forums these days :lol:

Oh, if someone at SMF is reading... I only had a very quick look at the source code, but even in less than a minute I managed to stumble upon a typo in a variable name :P 'bbcode_handling' is written as 'bbcode_hanlding'... Several times ;)
Title: Re: More thoughts on SMF 2.1
Post by: Arantor on August 17th, 2012, 11:35 PM
Quote
Well, it seems (from what I see in the changelogs) that they replaced the default theme with Penguin this week, so I was right on time or something.
*shrug* Moving on from Curve had to happen sooner or later.
Quote
And it's looking pretty good. Not Wedge-good I'm afraid, but good enough that there are a couple of details I might as well steal from them (the conveniently located Unread links for boards perhaps, the fine yet still sober buttons which really make me think I should reuse my own button stylings for topic buttons), and good enough that I'm amused (rather than upset) that they took ideas from Wedge... Again ;)
Among more minor things, the more noticeable is that they now use a mini-menu for post actions, just like Wedge.
Well, a mini-menu for actions is definitely an improvement, and I'm not in the slightest surprised that things are going both ways. In some ways I'm actually kind of pleased because what it means is there is less hostility going on and more that everyone's doing what's best for the software and community.
Quote
I just have to ask though... What is it with everyone going for Segoe UI these days? I'm actually considering just staying with Arial 14px because there are so many Segoe UI forums these days
It's popular, available easily and looks good. Hardly surprising more people are using it.
Title: Re: More thoughts on SMF 2.1
Post by: Nao on August 18th, 2012, 05:14 PM
Quote from Arantor on August 17th, 2012, 11:35 PM
*shrug* Moving on from Curve had to happen sooner or later.
Not that it sucked, but it was a bit behind its time... (At the time it was made, it was great though, very modern.)
(Not saying that Weaving is modern... It just is a bit more.)
Quote
Well, a mini-menu for actions is definitely an improvement, and I'm not in the slightest surprised that things are going both ways. In some ways I'm actually kind of pleased because what it means is there is less hostility going on and more that everyone's doing what's best for the software and community.
Yup.
Oh, and I knew I'd already seen this button style before... It's the Youtube interface, actually!
Quote
It's popular, available easily and looks good. Hardly surprising more people are using it.
Yeah, but too much Segoe is annoying... Just like Arial at a time. I find that Arial (or Helvetica for that matter) has a 'timeless' feel to it that makes it easy to rediscover over time. It goes by cycles. Segoe (or Myriad Pro for that matter, ahah) gets boring faster than Arial. Which doesn't mean it can't be rediscovered... Just that sometimes it needs tricks, like subtle changes in font color or spacing, to look fresh again. Arial doesn't need that as much IMHO.

Well, as I said, these days my local install varies between Segoe UI and Calibri, and since I never found out what I'll be using for the final official version, I'm sticking to Arial for now... Heck, I might even go back to Verdana if I'm sufficiently bored... :lol:
The main issue with Calibri is its odd x-height. Yesterday I finally found a Google webfont that has the same dimensions -- Source Sans Pro, the 'first open source font by Adobe'. Sure. But it's a Calibri rip-off, or replacement if you will :P
So now I'm tending towards using Calibri, with a Source Sans fallback (it has the disadvantage of being rather heavy, although not as much as PT Sans for instance. The solution is to just keep to non-bold non-italic versions, and basically have Wedge treat it like a Tahoma when it comes to using bold and italics... I know, it sucks!)

Or I could stick to Open Sans, too... I like it and it's lightweight :lol:

But it's a matter for another topic I guess...
Title: Re: More thoughts on SMF 2.1
Post by: emanuele on August 18th, 2012, 05:53 PM
Quote from Nao on August 17th, 2012, 11:23 PM
Oh, if someone at SMF is reading... I only had a very quick look at the source code, but even in less than a minute I managed to stumble upon a typo in a variable name :P 'bbcode_handling' is written as 'bbcode_hanlding'... Several times ;)
At least I've been consistent: I wrote all of them wrong!
Power of copy and paste! :angel:

I should change keyboard...as well as head. -_-
Title: Re: More thoughts on SMF 2.1
Post by: n on August 19th, 2012, 10:31 PM
Were can we see smf 2.1 ?

Edit: found it...
Title: Re: More thoughts on SMF 2.1
Post by: Arantor on August 19th, 2012, 10:40 PM
Go ask on simplemachines.org.

Though, if you have to ask, the odds are you probably shouldn't be using it anyway for the simple reason is that it is not considered stable enough even to have a public alpha.
Title: Re: More thoughts on SMF 2.1
Post by: n on August 20th, 2012, 01:01 PM
Quote from Arantor on August 19th, 2012, 10:40 PM
Go ask on simplemachines.org.

Though, if you have to ask, the odds are you probably shouldn't be using it anyway for the simple reason is that it is not considered stable enough even to have a public alpha.
Thanks for your advice!
Title: Re: More thoughts on SMF 2.1
Post by: Nao on August 22nd, 2012, 05:54 PM
Any thoughts on my font-related blurb above..?
Title: Re: More thoughts on SMF 2.1
Post by: Arantor on August 23rd, 2012, 04:07 PM
Yup, everything goes in cycles.

Arial looks good right now, though I do understand exactly what you're on about with fonts getting boring. I'm not a designer, so I don't really know what to suggest.
Title: Re: More thoughts on SMF 2.1
Post by: Arantor on August 25th, 2012, 01:07 AM
Quote
Well, right now I'm wondering if the relative success of Wuthering in the poll could be due to my using Segoe UI in it..?
Maybe if I changed it to Arial and I set Segoe UI here, we'd see a vote reversal immediately.
Try it. Did I link the article about Segoe UI, actually? http://www.datamation.com/columns/executive_tech/article.php/3601421 if you haven't seen it.

It's actually linked from a piece about MS' new logo which is as you mention, Segoe UI with 4 solid boxes. Even I can do better than that.

I like that new logo, is pretty neat :)
Title: Re: More thoughts on SMF 2.1
Post by: Nao on August 25th, 2012, 02:55 PM
Quote from Arantor on August 25th, 2012, 01:07 AM
Try it.
Well, done for a few hours but have yet to see any feedback... ;) I increased the font size but didn't test with an Arial fallback (too many things I'm working on at the same time...)
I have to say, I still prefer Arial right now. Probably something to do with the color contrast.
Quote
Did I link the article about Segoe UI, actually? http://www.datamation.com/columns/executive_tech/article.php/3601421 if you haven't seen it.
Nope, hadn't read it... It's an old article ;)
And yes, Segoe UI = Frutiger, although I would have said = Myriad Pro but it's true that Myriad itself is strongly inspired by Frutiger's works. (Well he's one of the most influential typeface designers... I guess at this point he's seen as the father of modern humanist fonts?)
Quote
It's actually linked from a piece about MS' new logo which is as you mention, Segoe UI with 4 solid boxes. Even I can do better than that.
I think I can trust you on that :lol:
Quote
I like that new logo, is pretty neat :)
Yeah it is innit?
But you know what? I already posted a preliminary version, which didn't spark any interest :P
http://wedge.org/pub/6271/logo-madness/msg272473/#msg272473
And other versions on the page before that...