« first day (3069 days earlier)      last day (111 days later) » 

00:49
[rubberduck-vba/Rubberduck] 1664 stars vs. [decalage2/oletools] 2248 stars
01:04
REFRESH!
[Minesweeper] 124 Games Played. 57 Bombs Used. 14475 Moves Performed. 22 New Users
[Rubberduck] 1 Synchronizations
[Zomis/Games] 1 issue comments
 
5 hours later…
 
6 hours later…
 
4 hours later…
15:56
@Blackhawk Yes, this runs on 64-bit Excel. It correctly returned the number of dimensions.
16:26
@MathieuGuindon Sounds like you want either Mongo fulltext search or elasticsearch.
I'd say Mongo would probably be cheaper, because you could easily run on the free version.
I don't know enough about elasticsearch pricing to say anything there, though.
We're using elasticsearch at my current client. Very interesting, but the query syntax is hell.
16:45
@Hosch250 elastic search is open source, so it's free if you host it. You would only pay if you wanted to use their cloud backend. github.com/elastic/elasticsearch
Nice.
Mat has a server, so hosting would probably be trivial.
I've seen many software built on ELK stack for searchable logs. It's a standard deployment
IDK about LogStash, but we're using the E and K at my current client.
Yeah, it doesn't have to be logs. The data can be whatever
We do have our logs in ES, though.
One index per microservice, except for the APIs, which are in App Insights.
It's a nightmare to trace logs through the systems, but whatever.
17:01
Maybe logstash could help! I know that the applications I am talking about are designed to trace a connection across the network so you can see the related logs from each system the connection passed through (Firewall, switch, proxy, endpoint)
@HackSlash How about multiple connections?
Also, I'm not in a position to make these recommendations, anyway.
But, our flow is servicebus messages through Kafka that get consumed and the consumers make api calls.
Then from the other side, we have a web client that makes calls to Node backends that make calls to C# backends.
 
4 hours later…
21:10
Is there any good reason why we have separate definitions for array bounds in the grammar depending on whether we are looking at a UDT member or a variable declaration?
That's likely something that was carried from the legacy grammar
Either that, or there had to be a legitimate reason, I'd think. Good question either way!
21:44
If I replace the variable one with the UDT one, which looks better, only the CodeBuilder breaks. However, that is just because it looks for array bounds in the old context type.
22:07
22:19
> Closes #6042

The reason for the above issue was that we did not resolve the array bounds on array variables. This oversight was probably caused by the fact that these were not part of an `arrayDim` context; they were in a distinct `subsripts` context.

This PR aligns the handling be parsing the array dimensions of array variables as `arrayDim` contexts. This required some adjustments in some other parts of the code base.
Should this change prove to be a problem later, reverting just the
22:35
> I am quite sure that this issue is a duplicate of #5853.
The version in the version info is the same as in that issue; it is the last release, which is from May of last year.
This should be fixed in a later version, i.e. in later pre-releases.
> I am quite sure that this issue is a duplicate of #5853.
The version in the version info is the same as in that issue; it is the last release, which is from May of last year.
This should be fixed in a later version, i.e. in later pre-releases.
I definitely cannot reproduce this with the latest build.
@Duga was waiting for Hacktoberfest to end, but yeah we're going to be resetting that 23K downloads soon and release v2.5.3
In other news, I got proper error pages working (locally), meaning actual 404 status codes, unlike the weird redirect that's currently live (the error pages all mess up the url and all say 200 OK)

« first day (3069 days earlier)      last day (111 days later) »