Let the student use their own laptops. Even buy them one instead of having computers on site that no one uses for coding but only for some multiple choice tests and to browse Facebook.

Teach them 10 finger typing. (Don't be too strict and allow for personal preferences.)

Teach them text navigation and editing shortcuts. They should be able to scroll per page, jump to the beginning or end of the line or jump word by word. (I am not talking vi bindings or emacs magic.) And no, key repeat is an antifeature.

Teach them VCS before their first group assignment. Let's be honest, VCS means git nowadays. Yet teach them git != GitHub.

Teach git through the command line. They are allowed to use a gui once they aren't afraid to resolve a merge conflict or to rebase their feature branch against master. Just committing and pushing is not enough.

Teach them test-driven development ASAP. You can even give them assignments with a codebase of failing tests and their job is to make them pass in the beginning. Later require them to write tests themselves.

Don't teach the language, teach concepts. (No, if else and for loops aren't concepts you god-damn amateur! That's just syntax!)

When teaching object oriented programming, I'd smack you if do inane examples with vehicles, cars, bikes and a Mercedes Benz. Or animal, cat and dog for that matter. (I came from a self-taught imperative background. Those examples obfuscate more than they help.) Also, inheritance is overrated in oop teachings.

Functional programming concepts should be taught earlier as its concepts of avoiding side effects and pure functions can benefit even oop code bases. (Also great way to introduce testing, as pure functions take certain inputs and produce one output.)

Focus on one language in the beginning, it need not be Java, but don't confuse students with Java, Python and Ruby in their first year. (Bonus point if the language supports both oop and functional programming.)

And for the love of gawd: let them have a strictly typed language. Why would you teach with JavaScript!?

Use industry standards. Notepad, atom and eclipse might be open source and free; yet JetBrains community editions still best them.

For grades, don't your dare demand for them to write code on paper. (Pseudocode is fine.)

Don't let your students play compiler in their heads. It's not their job to know exactly what exception will be thrown by your contrived example. That's the compilers job to complain about. Rather teach them how to find solutions to these errors.

Teach them advanced google searches.

Teach them how to write a issue for a library on GitHub and similar sites.

Teach them how to ask a good stackoverflow question :>

Preface: i'm pretty... definitely wasted. rum is amazing.

anyway, I spent today fighting with ActionCable. but as per usu, here's the rant's backstory:

I spent two or three days fighting with ActionCable a few weeks ago. idr how long because I had a 102*f fever at the time, but I managed to write a chat client frontend in React that hooked up to API Guy's copypasta backend. (He literally just copy/pasted it from a chat app tutorial. gg). My code wasn't great, but it did most of what it needed to do. It set up a websocket, had listeners for the various events, connected to the ActionCable server and channel, and wrote out updates to the DOM as they came in. It worked pretty well.

Back to the present!

I spent today trying to get the rest to work, which basically amounted to just fetching historical messages from the server. Turns out that's actually really hard to do, especially when THE FKING OFFICIAL DOCUMENTATION'S EXAMPLES ARE WRONG! Seriously, that crap has scoping and (coffeescript) syntax errors; it doesn't even run. but I didn't know that until the end, because seriously, who posts broken code on official docs? ugh! I spent five hours torturing my code in an effort to get it to work (plus however many more back when I had a fever), only to discover that the examples themselves are broken. No wonder I never got it working!

So, I rooted around for more tutorials or blogs or anything else with functional sample code. Basically every example out there is the same goddamn chat app tutorial with their own commentary. Remember that copy/paste? yeah, that's the one. Still pissed off about that. Also: that tutorial doesn't fetch history, or do anything other than the most basic functionality that I had already written. Totally useless to me.

After quite a bit of searching, the only semi-decent resource I was able to find was a blog from 2015 that's entirely written in Japanese. No, I can't read more than a handful of words, but I've been using it as a reference because its code is seriously more helpful than what's on official Rails docs. -_-

Still never got it to work, though. but after those five futile hours of fighting with the same crap, I sort of gave up and did something else.

zzz.

Anyway.
The moral of the story is that if you publish broken code examples beacuse you didn't even fking bother to test them first, some extremely pissed off and vindictive and fashionable developer will totally waterboard the hell out of you for the cumulative total of her wasted development time because screw you and your goddamn laziness.

Structure: decades of programming in too many languages to enumerate. I lean functional, but only when the language doesn't fight it. No matter what I'm doing, my code is immutable in practice, if not paradigm.

Syntax: No one thing in particular. I code differently depending on the language.

When I start learning a language, I'll find the standard style checker and create a project where I write an example of every single rule.

The end result is generally a quick intro to the language and a bonus understanding of the hot sports opinion in said language. I call this an ocean boiler.

I lean heavily into autoformatting because I've worked on too many projects to care, and I have a general expectation that something which is important enough to make a code standard is important enough to be enforced in tooling. I'd rather spend my time solving problems that thinking about stylistics.

Today on "How the Fuck is Python a Real Language?": Lambda functions and other dumb Python syntax.

Lambda functions are generally passed as callbacks, e.g. "myFunc(a, b, lambda c, d: c + d)". Note that the comma between c and d is somehow on a completely different level than the comma between a and b, even though they're both within the same brackets, because instead of using something like, say, universally agreed-upon grouping symbols to visually group the lambda function arguments together, Python groups them using a reserved keyword on one end, and two little dots on the other end. Like yeah, that's easy to notice among 10 other variable and argument names. But Python couldn't really do any better, because "myFunc(a, b, (c, d): c + d)" would be even less readable and prone to typos given how fucked up Python's use of brackets already is.

And while I'm on the topic of dumb Python syntax, let's look at the switch, um, match statements. For a long time, people behind Python argued that a bunch of elif statements with the same fucking conditions (e.g. x == 1, x == 2, x == 3, ...) are more readable than a standard switch statement, but then in Python 3.10 (released only 1 year ago), they finally came to their senses and added match and case keywords to implement pattern matching. Except they managed to fuck up yet again; instead of a normal "default:" statement, the default statement is denoted by "case _:". Because somehow, everywhere else in the code _ behaves as a normal variable name, but in match statement it instead means "ignore the value in this place". For example, "match myVar:" and "case [first, *rest]:" will behave exactly like "[first, *rest] = myVar" as long as myVar is a list with one or more elements, but "case [_, *rest]:" won't assign the first element from the list to anything, even though "[_, *rest] = myVar" will assign it to _. Because fuck consistency, that's why.

And why the fuck is there no fallthrough? Wouldn't it make perfect sense to write

case ('rgb', r, g, b):
case ('argb', _, r, g, b):
case ('rgba', r, g, b, _):
case ('bgr', b, g, r):
case ('abgr', _, b, g, r):
case ('bgra', b, g, r, _):

and then, you know, handle r, g, and b values in the same fucking block of code? Pretty sure that would be more readable than having to write "handeRGB(r, g, b)" 6 fucking times depending on the input format. Oh, and never mind that Python already has a "break" keyword.

Speaking of the "break" keyword, if you try to use it outside of a loop, you get an error "'break' outside loop". However, there's also the "continue" keyword, and if you try to use it outside of a loop, you get an error "'continue' not properly in loop". Why the fuck are there two completely different error messages for that? Does it mean there exists some weird improper syntax to use "continue" inside of a loop? Or is it just another inconsistent Python bullshit where until Python 3.8 you couldn't use "continue" inside the "finally:" block (but you could always use "break", even though it does essentially the same thing, just branching to a different point).

What were some of your "OH MY GOD I'M AN AWESOME CODE WIZARD!" moments?

For example, I can remember two or three:
One was when I, with only cursory knowledge of C, never having worked with it but having been exposed to it (and having lots of experience with C# therefore familiar with the c-family syntax), took 5 minute look at a source code and pointed out a bug that the student working on it was trying to solve for the past 2 hours. Sadly, I don't remember what the bug was anymore.

Second one was on reddit, someone posted to gamedev group a 2minute video from his voxel+ai framework he was working on, I watched it, and without any idea what it's written in, or how, I was like "you seem to be dropping frames in a pretty regular manner unrelated to anything I see happening on the screen. You're creating too much garbage on frame-by-frame basis (probably while your AI is exploring what to do), look into object pooling, it'll help".

And the guy responded in a few hours like "by gosh, you're right! thank you! and what do you think about the source code?" (he linked git repo below the video.

And I was like OMG I'M A MAGE, I DIDN'T EVEN CLICK THE REPO LINK, ONLY NOW AFTERWARDS, AND yeah, it's c++ so sadly nothing for me, but OMG I JUST WROTE THE FIRST THING THAT CAME TO MY MIND, DIDN'T EXPECT IT TO BE CORRECT, I'M AWESOME.

=D and the feeling stayed with me for about two days.

(If it's not clear yet, it's perfectly okay, in fact, required, to brag about yourself in answering this question ;) )

I have an idea to make server side html. Just for fun. Or for noobs who just wants to know web development.
Example syntax:
<html listen=80>
... something amazing
</html>

Any suggestions/ideas??
(This could also be the much needed revolution for backend)

Me yesterday evening:

"Fuck java, fuck JVM, fuck everything about it, shit doesn't work for some reason, no runtime errors, no compiler errors, no syntax errors, nothing, *turns off computer*".

Me today morning(coffee = false), after comparing the documented example code provided by the API with one someone else made, I've noticed that the one provided by the API was messed up and couldn't work.

"Lemme change that one value in the properties...okay here we go"
Shit works out perfectly.

FUCK FALSELY DOCUMENTED CODE

FUCK DOCUMENTATIONS IN GENERAL

How the Common Lisp Community will eventually die soon:

Clojure is the only main Lisp dialect having some sort of heavy presence in today's modern development world. Yes, I am aware of other(if not all) environments in which Lisp or a dialect of it is being used for multiple things, CADLisp, Guile Scheme, Racket, etc etc whatever. I know.

Not only is Clojure present in the JVM(I give 0 fucks about whether you like it or not also) but also has compilation targets for Javascript via Clojurescript. This means that i can effectively target backend server operations, damn near everything inside of the JVM and also the browser.
Yet, there is no real point in using Lisp or Clojure other than for pure academic endeavours, for which it is not even a pure functional programming language, you would be better served learning something else if you want true functional purity. But also because examples for one of the major areas in software development, mainly web, are really lacking, like, lacking bad, as in, so bad most examples are few in between and there is no interest in making it target complete beginners or anything of the like.

But my biggest fucking gripe with Lisp as a whole, specifically Common Lisp, is how monstrously outdated the documentation you can find available for it is.

Say for example, aesthetics, these play a large role, a developer(web mostly) used to the attention to detail placed by the Rails community, the Laravel community, django, etc etc would find on documentation that came straight from the 90s. There is no passion for design, no attention to detail, it makes it look hacky and abandoned. Everything in Lisp looks so severely abandoned for which the most abundant pool of resources are not even made present on a fully general purpose language constrained as a scripting environment for a text editor: Emacs with Emacs Lisp which I reckon is about the most used Lisp dialect in the planet, even more so than Clojure or Common Lisp.

I just want the language to be made popular again y'know? To have a killer app or framework for it much like there is Rails for Ruby, Phoenix for Elixir, etc etc. But unless I get some serious hacking done to bring about the level of maturity of those frameworks(which I won't nor I believe I can) then it will always remain a niche language with funny syntax.

To be honest I am phasing away my use of Clojure in place of Pharo. I just hate seeing how much the Lisp community does in an effort to keep shit as obscure and far away from the reach of new developers as possible. I also DESPISE reading other Lisp developer's code. Far too fucking dense and clever for anyone other than the original developer to read and add to. The idea that Lisp allows for read only code is far too real man.

Lisp has been DED for a while, and the zombies that remain will soon disappear because the community was too busy playing circle jerks for anything real to be done with it. Even as the original language of AI it has been severely outshined by the likes of Python, R and Scala, shit, even Javascript has more presence in AI than Lisp does now a days.

I'm really tired of all the hype that Python lately gets, mostly by begginers or at most mediors.

I get that a lot of people like it's syntax, but it has just a few use cases where it really shines (like CI scripting or ML). In other cases it always has a much better and much more mature alternative.

As a web developer I would always pick PHP over Python. It has really mature frameworks like Symfony or Laravel which are using PSR standards, well documented and implemented common patterns, option for strict typing and probably most importantly tons of libraries for pretty much everything. For example I could find implementation of payment gate for even the smallest banks in our country, thus saving several days of implementing it myself. And PHP will always humiliate Python in performance. Yet, pretty much every comparison article of those two will state Python as better option for webdev, mostly because it is evident that the person who wrote the article never even tried to do a proper atleast midsized project in PHP, but has ton of experience in Django.

And what exactly is my point? There are two in fact:

1) You should always use the right tools for the job.
2) Even if you could do something doesn't mean you should do it.

In the end of the day I shouldn't really be bothered by people hyping Python, but those fanatics really made me hate the language, even if I would normally consider looking into it.

My C# class loves to come up with weird/unrealistic scenarios to teach a specific language feature... I feel like the more effective way to teach would be to mention a real life scenario where it makes more sense to use the feature and give it some context rather than coming up with some arbitrary series of classes to represent departments and employees and then say "write extension methods for them to write them out"

If you tell me that I'm going to go, ok this works, but is there a specific reason I should do this instead of using a for or foreach to do the exact same thing? Don't get me wrong I see the appeal of extension methods as well as LINQ but this class never gives any sort of context as to why we're doing stuff. This class could be good, I've had classes that focus on language specific features taught in ways that make sense... My Java prof did a great job...

Also all the slides are terribly written...

Like I attached an example of the description for extension methods... The slides then go on to explain how the syntax for them works and gives an example...

Like ok I guess technically you told me what they are and how to use them, but gave zero context...

On the opposite end of the spectrum, I go to MSDN for their definition of extension methods, and it is much more clearly written and gives context to where/why they're used... and this is supposed to be a 5th semester course...

I've been BSing my skillset for so long to myself, it's a veritable toolbox of mixed knowledge but no complete sets...

I wonder if it's too late for me to catch up or if I will ever actually complete any learning...

I am yet to finish learning

Html
CSS
PHP
Ruby
C#
ASM I can do i386 but not x86
VB
Pascal if you can believe
C
C++
Java
JS
Python
Powershell
Bash

My main skill is basically just remembering anything I do, including code syntax and example code fragments well enough to quote at people which makes me a lazy learner.

My favorite thing is searching a problem on Stack Overflow, and the only example you find was solved by fixing a simple syntax error.

😒

use the GPT they said...

it will buy you some time they continue...

... took me half a day to notice its stupid syntax err which broke the 50 line sniped ( no err in the console ofc ( thanks JS ) )

it would probably take me no more than 15 mins to find a proper example anywhere on the net and apply my vars to it...

I remember learning how to program 5-6 years ago. It was completely broken. All of these “courses” just teach the syntax of a language. They usually don’t even teach how it works or what it’s used for. Knowing the syntax is great and all, but what’s important is learning to apply it to solve problems.

A lot of other basic things are often overlooked as well. For example, introducing a text editor and the command line would have been incredibly valuable.

For a long while I was using online editors and logging the output of functions instead of actually making projects.

I’m glad I kind of created my own way of learning: by making projects. Just hopping into something was the best way to learn from me. If I got stuck, I’d simply look it up. As a result, I was able to actually apply my skills to learn.

!rant just a question. Sorry in advance for the long post.

I've been working in IT in Windows infrastructure and networking side of things for my entire career (5years) and recently was hired for a role working with AWS.

We use Macs and we use *nix distros for days. I've only ever dabbled for 'funsies' before with Linux because every previous job I held was a Windows house and f*** all else.

I'm just wondering if anyone here might have some insights as to a great way to learn the Linux environment and to learn it the right way. I'm not the best Windows admin ever and will never claim to be, but I have seen stuff that other people have done that makes me want to swing a brick at someone's head. And I feel that with all of the setup wizards and the "We'll just do it for you." approach that Windows has used since forever it allowed enough wiggle room for people that didn't know what they were doing to f*** sh*t up royally. I'm not familiar enough with Linux to know if this is also a common problem. I know that having literal full-access to every file in your OS can cause a n00b like myself to mess up royal, thus the question about learning Linux the right way.

I vaguely understand the organization of the folders and file structure within Linux, and I know some very basic commands.

sudo rm -rf /*
Just kidding

But All of my co-workers at my new job are like mighty oaks of knowledge while I'm a tiny sapling. And at times I've been intimidated by how little I know, but equally motivated to try and play catch-up.

In addition to all of this, I really want to start learning how to program. I've tried learning multiple times from places like codecademy.com, YouTube tutorials, and codeschool.com but I feel like I'm missing the lesson that explains why to use a certain operation instead of another. Example: if/else in lieu of a switch.

I'm also failing to get the concept of syntax in certain languages I've tried before. Java comes to mind real fast.

The first language I tried teaching myself was C++ from YouTube. I ended up having a fever dream that night about coding and woke up in a cold sweat. Literally, like brain overload or something. I was watching tutorials for like 9 hours straight.

Does anyone know of a training resource that will explain, in terms a 5 year old would understand, what the code is doing and why? I really want to learn but I'm starting to lose steam cause I'm just not getting it.

Thank you in advance for any tips guys and gals. I really appreciate it. Sorry for the ridiculously long questions.

hey devs, quick question:
does rust support branchless conditionnals and jump tables, and if yes where to look for syntax?

i found no example for branchless so far and jump tables are scary in rust (and i need a library to use them, it seems).

inb4 "why in the hell/ what possible use those have?!":
i use branchless to make a looping array and jump tables whenever there's more than 4 if statements with equal probability, and the deciding factor is a numeric value, so quite often.

TFW you see ruby syntax and claim it's not even a programming language, then someone shows you a working example...

I saw a video on tiktok a couple days ago that had a pretty interesting opinion. The guy said that we should stop creating programming languages and stick to only a couple.

His main point was because with all these different programming languages, there is different syntaxes the programmer has to learn. Even some of the universal syntaxes are different in some languages. For example, in Rust, to print something you use “println!(...);”

He said this is counter productive because in a majority of other programming languages, the ! Means negation. He also said something about Golang also having some of those syntax problems but I can’t remember exactly.

His point was that if we stuck to a single syntax, then we could spend more time doing productive stuff and less time relearning how to do stuff with different syntax. For example, in mathematics all symbols have pretty much the same meaning across the field. An equals sign will always mean the same thing.

What do u guys think? I thought it was an interesting opinion and I think I agree to some degree . I’ll post the link to the video if I find it again

If somebody needs a project idea how about a really dumb JS Framework that allows you do basic DOM Manipulation, just like jQuery, directly in the elements class attribute.

For example this is how a document could look like:
<body class="init-hide-id-otherElement">
<button class="onclick-show-id-otherElement">
<h1 id="otherElement">Hello</h2>
</body>

What this does is first, at the body's init-* class, it hides the element with id otherElement at page load. Then, when you click the button, the element with id otherElement gets shown. Instead of *-id-* you could also use *-class-* which selects a class.
Basically the syntax is:
<event>-<action>-<id/class>-<the elements id/class>

Of course this has a lot of limitations, for example the selectors are very limited, but it would still be very cool!

It's nice that more and more languages are introducing async/await syntax, but by the example of Rust in particular I'm starting to wonder why we don't instead introduce this syntax for monads in general?

We could have a keyword (say, `bind`) which unwraps a value from any monad provided that the return value of the function is wrapped in the same monad. The ? operator does something a little similar, and I'll be intrigued whether it can actually be implemented for monads other than Result and Option once GATs are stabilized. In particular in the case of Rust, it would be possible to create a reference counting monad for heap-bound management of objects derived from references.

Random thoughts on more out of the box tools/environments.

Subject: Pharo

Some time ago I had shown one of my coworkers about Pharo and he quickly got the main idea behind it but mentioned how he didn't like the idea of leaving behind his text editor to deal with source code.

Some time last week I showed the dude some cool 3d animations you can do with Pharo while simultaneously manipulating the code to change them in real time. Now that caught his attention particularly and he decided he wanted to know more about the language but in particular the benefits of fucking around with an image based environment rather than a file based.

Both of us reached the conclusion that image based makes file based dev enviroments seem quaint in comparison, but estimated that it was nothing more than a sentiment rather than a fact.

We then considered what could be the advantage/disadvantages of such environments but I couldn't come up with anything other than the system not having something like Vim or VS Code or whatever which people love, but that it makes up for it with some of the craziest IDE tools I had ever seen. Plugins in this case act like source code repos that you can download and activate into your workflow in what feels something similar to VS Code being extended via plugins written in JS, and since the GUI is maleable as it is(because everything is basically just subsets of morp h windows) then extending functionality becomes so intuitive that its funny

Whereas with Emacs(for example) you have to really grind your gears with Elisp or Vimscript in Vim etc etc, with Pharo your plugin system is basicall you just adding classes that will convert your OS looking IDE into something else.

Because of how light the vm machine is, portability is a non issue, and passing pharo programs arround is not like installing Java in which you need the JVM.

Source code versioning, very important, already integrated into every live environment and can be extended to do pushes through simple key bindings with no hassle.

I dunno, I just feel that the tool is too good to be true. I keep trying to push limits into it but thus far I have found: data visualization and image modeling to work fine, web development with Teapot to be a cakewalk and work fine, therr are even packages for Arduino development.

I think its biggest con would be the image based system, but would really need to look into how this is bad by any reason other than "aww man I want vim!" since apparently some psychos already made Emacs and VS code packages for interfacing with Pharo source trees.

Embedded is certainly out of the question for any real project since its garbage collected and not the most performant cookie in the jar.

For Data science I can see some future, seems just as intuitive and interesting as a Jupyter Notebook actually, but the process can't and will not be the same since I still don't know of a way to save playground snippets unless you literally create classes for it, in which case every model you build gets saved inside of an object, sounds possible but, strange since it is not a the most common workflow in jupyter.

Some of the environment is sometimes glitchy, but it does have continuos development and have not found many hassles.

There is a biased factor from my side: I seem to be wired to understand the syntax and simple object model better than in other languages. To me this feels natural as if I was just writing ideas rather than code, mostly because I feel that there really ain't much in terms of syntax, the language gets out of my way and the IDE feels like the most intuitive environment in the world to me. I can see why some people would find it REALLY weird of counterintuitive tho.

Guess I really am a simple dude.

this is a repost organization post. each time you are going to post a classical joke, please find it from items below, and write as comment, the number of the repost. and people will give you ++'s to your comments as if you actually reposted the post. also, feel free to make additions to the list. syntax is:

"(n): [repost context]" for a new item (please do not mess with the order)

"-- [n]: [personal comment]" for simulating the repost.

here we go:

(0): the comic strip about rescuing princesses in different languages.

(1): in case of fire git commit, git push, leave the building.

(2): wanna hear a udp joke? i don't care if you get it.

(3): that joke about java devs wearing glasses because they can't c#.

--------------

An example repost:

-- 0: omg princess lol :)))

Is there anything like a reverse search engine, that let's you enter e.g. some js code and it tells you what language feature has been used? Imagine you see syntax you've never used before and don't know what it's called or what it does but would like to know more about it.

The fact that i no longer have to bother knowing or googling about generic java classes, lambda expression, regex, SQL syntax etc, and just ask ChatGPT to show me a code example of it - blows my fucking brain off

So, I just finished a semester project on Software Project Management, and this was my self analysis and my conclusions, along with my analysis of my team. I think some of you will relate. Hope you enjoy the reading!

My main contributions to the project were helping reviewing the documents syntax, to make sure it was smooth and easy to read with a good english level, working on the systems architecture, coding the application, helping measuring problems within the project and putting people to work by distributing tasks.
I tried to help whenever I could with things that were not assigned to me, even though we are a team, everyone must do what they are assigned for, otherwise disorganization will be installed and everyone will derive from what they are doing to focus on a single thing or point and that would cost us time. I tried to avoid that to see if people could be capable enough of fixing the problems presented to them with the least help possible, making that an example for future use so they don’t always rely on others to get tasks done and to be more independent. Also, helping others figuring out what they were supposed to do helped the team wasting less human resources and consuming less time, which lead to some faster developments on specific tasks. Making the impossible possible was kinda of a weekly routine when the deadline approached because time was short and sometimes tasks were not finished when they should be, so, in a way I helped speedrunning documents to see if they were close to presentable to the client.
As the overall performance, there were highs and lows, where some members worked more than others and that is not fair for everyone because that kept happening again and again, so, my point of view performance wise is that we behaved wrongly when it came down to it. Some of us kept on pushing tasks to others and continuously criticizing over other people’s work without having a logical background to motivate those critiques neither providing solutions to the problems encountered. Well, that couldn’t end well, and it didn’t. It brought our performance down and ended up causing a lot of damage on the project itself.

Hey guys ! I want to start some kind of blog so I can share my experiences and tinkering with stuff.
I can't seem to find a good CMS for that ? I've no problem with coding the blog myself (with Rails preferably), but I'd like to not start from scratch ! I'll need handle syntax coloration for code samples for example.
Any advices, ready-to-use stuff or not ? :)

Hey guys, any WPF developers here?

I'm having lotsa trouble getting WPF XAML data bindings to work. Disclaimer - I'm new to OOP and thhe syntax of OOP is so damn confusing I'm never sure anything is the "right" way.

The task is to create test data for certain classes and output it in WPF. The code I have is a public static class that generates test data for certain classes and stores these objects inside a static List<Object> depending on the object. I couldn't figure out any other way to store all these objects to later be able to output them.

Then I found out that you can use ObservableCollection to automate a lot of the CRUD stuff. So I tried to change the Lists to static ObservableCollections. It mostly works and I even got it to output the data in XAML by using DataGrid.ItemsSource = TestDataCreationClass.authors in the MainWindow.xaml.cs. However, I can not for the life of me figure out how to do the bind through XAML only using the ItemsSource property. No matter what I do, it cannot find the Collection.

I googled for quite a while and every example seems completely different from mine so I'm at a loss.

If you need any more info or code snippets I'd be glad to provide them.

Any kind of help is appreciated.
Thanks in advance!

can't see what i'm doing wrong in terms of syntax, or what required field im supposedly missing

visual comparison against older example IDE is happy about can't see difference

copy paste workign example and update params to what i want for new one, seems happy

i fucking hate you typescript

i guess i should've put this shit through kaleidoscope or any other advanced diff, if i owned any or cared

if i need to debug further ill consider it