So I Finally Learned How To Code

Alright, I'll bite, but only because I'm drunk No one writes HTML by hand anymore. No one. Everyone uses a framework. So it's fine and dandy that you know how to write some HTML, as you should, but you should learn at least 1 framework (flask is a good starting point) just to learn how they work. Learn about twitter bootstrap and then just find bootstrap styles you like and modify them to your need. Writing HTML/CSS entirely from scratch is retarded in 2016.

Then once you understand one MVC framework you understand them all. They're all the same thing except for language.

Just go back to code academy and click on the JavaScript videos this time, fuck. It's all JavaScript. Don't listen to the libraryfags. jQuery, Node, Angular, Bootstrap, it's all fucking JavaScript.

This is most likely bait, but I'll bite on the off-chance that you might be genuine.

HTML+CSS is not coding, those are not programming language. All of HTML is static, i.e. it just specified how the document looks like and that's it. CSS has some animation capabilities, but that's it. If you want to make your website do something you will have to use JavaScript. JS is a scripting language, that means it is a programming language that doesn't run on the bare metal, it needs some environment to run on. In your case that's the web-browser. JavaScript can be used to change the web page itself: you can add or remove elements, move them around, take input, show output and all the fancy client-side dynamic stuff. jQuery and Angular.js are JavaScript frameworks, it's some JS you drop in your web page and then you get a bunch of functions made by other people you can use. It's handy and can save you some time, but don't over-rely on them. And most importantly, be careful with JS, you can easily make your web pages an abomination that burns through the user's CPU. In fact, you should use JS only when you have to, and always make the web page be functional without JS when possible. It doesn't have to be pretty or fancy, but it has to be functional.

For learning JavaScript I recommend the book Eloquent JavaScript, you can buy it or you can read it online for free.
eloquentjavascript.net/

All of this is client-side, i.e. the code runs on the user's machine. If you want server-side programming things get more complicated. Server-side is when you want the user to send you some data and then your web-server generate a custom-made web page just for them. Think of an account on an email provider's website: it would be unfeasible to have a web page for every possible link a user could press; instead when the user logs in their data is fetched from a database and a custom HTML+CSS document is generated on the fly and sent back to the user. This requires actual coding on the web server to process the request, generate the document and send the reply back. There are many languages that can do that: Python, Racket, Ruby, Common Lisp, C/C++, Node (server-side JavaScript), and so on.

Node is popular with web developers because it lets them use the same language they use for client-side, but I would not recommend it. JavaScript is not a good language, it's a hack made in ten day (literally) to animate dancing monkeys on websites. Learn a better-designed language instead for server-side. Python is a decent one for beginners, just keep in mind that it's not a language to write everything in either (no language is).

...

How good is codeacademy?

I don't like bootstrap, it changes a lot of things I don't think need changing, and it's a pain in the ass to override it.

...

That explains why the HTML and CSS in most websites is so fucking absurdly bloated to hell and back.

They don't go in-depth or teach anything advanced AFAIK, but it's one of if not THE best places to learn the ropes of whatever language they have tutorials for.

Learn Javascript next.

Terry would be very dissapointed in you you CIA nigger

...

I remember when I was like 11 and I made a shitty website on some free hosting crap. I hardly had any clue as to what I was doing, but it was easy enough to make a completely functional site by just looking things up.

Good thing HTML isn't code though, or the mess I made wouldn't have compiled.

Hyperlinks, images, and text. That's all you need.

Coding or "encoding" does not imply computer programming. All it implies is writing your data into a form of code.

Actually it's not. You think there are thousands of different MVC frameworks because hyperlinks, images, and text are "all you need"? As soon as you want to do anything more complex than single page static websites you're gonna need a fucking framework. No? You'd rather reimplement SSL and oauth on your own? Be my guest, but don't be surprised when it gets hacked by Ramjesh an hour after you deploy it.

Is this coding?

yes but it's the most secure and non bloated way to do it.

yes but it's the most secure and non bloated way to do it.

Writing it all by hand is barely maintainable. Let's say you want a navbar on every page of the site. You would have to copy-paste the navbar for every page manually and if you want to make a change you have to make that change everywhere. And if you want the link to the current page to look different you have to adjust that as well for every page individually.

The safest way is to use a generator that takes in templates and content and generates the output. You get the nice automatic generation with all the benefits of static HTML.

...

Yes, applying "markup" data to your data according to rules of "markup language" is indeed coding.

You can do all that by hand with the use of a kind of web page preprocessor. You don't need to implement this work according to the MVC architecture.

A preprocessor/templating language doesn't need to work according to "MVC." Just because it's one of the most popular architectures for web applications doesn't change the fact that no one writes it like that anymore. They use a templating language to help.

The reason why you write whole static websites by hand is because the website is trivial in scope. I do this all the time as I maintain websites for various local groups. The purpose of these websites is to be an "online brochure" to advertise a bit of information about the group. There are plenty of groups like this that are adequately served with simple static pages that are crafted by hand.

Even that can be better served with a templating language and a static site generator.
Even suckless fags have a static site generator. For fucks sake, man.

Under the architecture that I've established, I can host a huge number of these sites from my personal home server. I wrote the webserver myself from scratch for the explicit requirement of taking the minimum of computing resources. If I felt that I needed to do some kind of preprocessing (like designing navlink templates for example), I can either put that "templating" functionality into the web server or have the site run through a full Apache installation. So far for my requirements, I really haven't needed it. I'm very happy to copy and paste the code for these specific websites.

Based user
-No bloat
-Minimal resources
-Less security problems

You don't need to do that with a static site generator using a templating language.

That's why frames were invented.

I'm actually a firm believer in reusing the tools that other people have written, I don't believe in needlessly reimplementing the wheel. In this specific case, it was worth my time and expertise to implement my solution in this manner. The websites I host are so simple in scope that I felt it was worth the effort to reading the complete HTTP RFC in order to implement the most minimal of the webservers. At the moment, I'm hosting seven different websites but in my testing, I ran 200 websites and my server didn't break a sweat.

This is why you define your common elements in a single CSS file. Pages are for discrete content, the style sheet defines and describes the interface.

Sure, use a framework for back end needs but you are a failure if you can't figure out how to build a maintainable front end by hand from HTML and CSS. It's simple as fuck, you just can't be a scatter brained retard about it.

Never heard of a master page?

I don't think you people know what a static site generator is. You have a template language (e.g. Jinja) and a markup language (e.g. Markdown, reStructuredText, HTML). You write your templates in HTML with little placeholders sprinkled in. You write your content separately. Then you run the generator, which takes the two (possibly separate) parts (templates and content) and outputs pure static HTML + CSS files. You then publish the built results on your server.

You can have the theme and the website project as Git repositories on your server and set the server up so that when a Git push happens it rebuilds all the static content and publishes the new version. No frameworks, no special server software, just pure HTML+CSS as if it was written by hand.

Here are two examples of generators:
jekyllrb.com/
blog.getpelican.com/

And here is an article about static site generator by GitLab:
about.gitlab.com/2016/06/03/ssg-overview-gitlab-pages-part-1-dynamic-x-static/

For anyone who needs for than a few disjointed pages with no connection, but doesn't need a dynamic backend, a static site generator is the only reasonable solution.

Read SICP.

What this nigger said. I didn't know any html or css up until a week and a half ago and I've already gone and made a full site (pretty much just a blog) from scratch in html and css without using any bullshit scripts or trackers like most sites have these days using the hugo site generator.

You don't need a static site generator just to use templates m8

i've been trying to write a simple web scraper to do a google search from the command line. should be simple write? just grab the html and parse it...

wrong! why the fuck do these silicon valley assholes need to make this so difficult?? fucking obfuscated shitty javascript used to generate the actual html because
fuck silicon valley i hope it gets nuked.

Just fuck around with it. Make different sorts of websites, and solve any problems you come across. You'll want Javascript for cool dynamic webpages, and a backend language working with databases.
For backend programming you want to learn a real language. There's Perl if you want to do is the old fashioned way, PHP, Python and Ruby on Rails for the new standards, and pretty much every other programming language if you want to do it your own way. Get comfy with a language, learn some data structures and algorithms, and go through a best practises document.
As for databases learn how to connect to a PostgreSQL database, and how relational databases work. Think of them as really powerful spreadsheets. If you can do all that then you're better than the average web dev.

They want people to pay to do that. The text appears in browsers like elinks, so a user agent that pretends to be a pre-javascript browser might work.

i tried setting javascriptEnabled to false in firefox desired_capabilities but that didn't work. also tried changing the user agent but no luck yet. i just need to keep messing with it.

OP just keep building shit. Don't worry too much about if it looks shitty (on the inside or outside). Going back and redesigning something is a good exercise too.

I would stay away from node. I decided to do a project with it and holy fuck the asynchronous callback shit is driving me mad. It's asynchronous, but single threaded. Maybe I'm stupid, but it seems to completely overcomplicate simple tasks.

There are html tags for collapseable menus and scrolling text. Toss in some animated gifs and you've got a rare, well-designed site without useless cancer like js or php.

some is finally doing this... I've had this idea for a few years now.

You're pretty fucking useless aren't you?

This is not a trivial accomplishment. It requires knowledge in machine vision, video codecs and 3d display. I know about the theory that drives this technology and I can't be bothered to implement it like this one does.

I know it's not trivial but if you had the idea and the sufficient drive you could've done it in three years, if not a significant amount of the work required and you would've learned a lot in the process.

If you complete the code academy course, can you write down the language in your resume?

Do you feel that you are a "good enough" programmer? By this I mean that if someone gives you a detailed specification, are you able to write a program that solves the specification? If so, then I would accept your experience in the language even if you haven't actually implemented something practical in the language. If not, you can try to develop your programming skill using that language of choice.

adriann.github.io/programming_problems.html

Does that mean once you've grasped one language, it's easy to say that you are able to code in many different languages as it should be large differences in syntax and commands between languages?

Not exactly. It's not "once you have grasped a language", but once you have grasped a programming paradigm. After that, learning another language of the same paradigm is pretty much learning its syntax and libraries, yeah.

Wasnt this around for years, why haven't they fixed anything

oh and it doesn't explain the use of semi colons either

Are you retarded? SSL and oauth aren't handled by the frontend. Why don't you stop LARPing and actually program you useless fuck