« first day (1849 days earlier)      last day (3158 days later) » 

12:05 AM
@enderland - you in for some wow?
 
user55340
 
12:44 AM
@Telastyn probably not, feeling horrible tonight and going to bed early
 
fair enough, enjoy.
 
1:27 AM
@MichaelT Zorb
 
8:38 AM
questions like this posted by users with linked Math.SE accounts make me wonder if it makes sense to establish Duga tracking for "programmers" comments at Math.SE...
This "exchange" is the undergraduate while "overflow" is the graduate level may because of the idea for Math vs MathOverflow and Physics vs PhysicsOverflow (not SE related) leaking into other domains. While I don't believe that that naming distinction needs to be fixed (nor can we do anything about it), being able to more promptly close (and delete) the debugging and blatantly off topic questions with a minimum of additional community moderation needed. — MichaelT Sep 20 at 19:59
...if memory serves I even once checked Math.SE meta for maybe there are posts misleading folks to post garbage at Programmers, but there was none. Maybe these under/graduate theories are spreading over there in comments
 
 
2 hours later…
10:53 AM
I still think that undergrad/phd thing was just one weirdo and not indicative of a trend
 
 
2 hours later…
1:01 PM
@Ixrec there is probably a trend, I noticed long ago that many extremely low quality questions are from folks with linked Math accounts (that's when I checked their meta for misleading guidance (and found nothing)). I only couldn't imagine that they've got a "theory" for that, I thought it's the routine way: dump garbage at SO -> hit the question block -> try next site
 
 
8 hours later…
8:34 PM
I'd rather recommend you to post your question on (programmers.stackexchange.com) since this question is too specific to be solved on stackoverflow. Post-fix the URL with help/on-topic to show you a short description what kind of questions are appropriate on this stackexchange subdomain. — isi 44 secs ago
 
 
2 hours later…
10:16 PM
anyone here?
 
hi
 
@Ixrec I tried to solve a problem with regex and now I have two problems
got a few minutes to try and help?
 
not sure I can solve it while watching The Matrix with SFF chat, but shoot
 
basically, order is not guaranteed in JSON
 
nope
 
10:22 PM
i bet you can already guess the problem
 
that's why you need a deep comparison routine other than stringify()
 
i have a class that attempts to match a serialized json object with a pattern template string
 
define "pattern template string"
 
if (pattern.match(serializedJson)) then hooray!
but it's really dumb
what's happening is, my unit test in eclipse is passing, but for some reason maven surefire plugin is failing on the same test
 
maybe try a JSON Schema validator?
 
10:24 PM
the only difference is that the elements of a java Map are in the wrong order.
one solution would be a smarter regex that could do the comparison not caring about the order of these elements
another solution would be to not use regex.
a third solution is to figure out why maven is disagreeing with eclipse and fix that
 
I happen to be in an environment where a genuine deep compare method is already available and using it is a one-liner, so...I'm biased towards don't use regex
before we had that routine we had a different utility function that sorted an object's keys to ensure the stringifications were consistent, and that's a really easy one to write if you have nothing better available
 
you're talking about deserializing the json string again, basically.
 
yeah, inevitably you need to deserialize to do a proper comparison
 
it sounds to me like, since i don't have an out of the box solution like you have, this is not going to be an easy fix.
 
or the moral equivalent of deserializing
are there any JSON Schema validator implementations in Java? I think that could save you the trouble of sorting keys or deep comparing things yourself
this way you end up writing a schema instead of a regex, which should be more readable and more correct than a regex
 
10:35 PM
I know it's making valid json
 
I was assuming you wanted a specific format of json
 
oh, the problem is that I didn't know what a json schema is
I confused myself, but I understand now
 
ah, ok
yeah I'm thinking of the JSON equivalent of an .xsd file
so you can declaratively list what properties need to be in each object, and so on
 
ugh this will take forever.
I'm supposed to be on vacation but nooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
I'm in las vegas.
 
lol
you can probably hack up a shorter-term solution with regex or post-deserialization checks that will catch only the cases you're really worried about
 
10:48 PM
@Ixrec I did hack up a shorter term solution that is slightly less thorough than the old one but is good enough for now.
 
lots of ORs?
 
@Ixrec No, I'm no longer validating that the data exactly matches the configuration file
I replaced a string like GCZ3 with [A-Z]{3}[0-9]
 
heh
 
I did do a backreference check to make sure it at least matches itself (the string is in two places)
 
should be fine until you're back from vacation
 
10:51 PM
With any luck I will have a different job in a month so whatever
 
 
1 hour later…
11:58 PM
omfg
@Ixrec still here?
 
barely but yes
 
the CME releases a list of security definitions
the one you can download from their ftp server has this:
872=00000000001101110000000 or something
 
I'm guessing I can't help much with this one
 

« first day (1849 days earlier)      last day (3158 days later) »