3 ms·
imo GitHub has to be up there. I think some of the recent changes to search and making the code view more IDE-like are steps backward from a “polish” perspecti
by ccakes 2y ago
imo GitHub has to be up there. I think some of the recent changes to search and making the code view more IDE-like are steps backward from a “polish” perspective, but still useful features
- masklinn 2y agoCouldn’t disagree more. GitHub has jank from the api to the ui.
- robin_reala 2y agoGitHub specifically has the issue mentioned in this blog post! It annoyed me so much I had to file it with them three years ago, and it’s still not fixed: https://github.com/orgs/community/discussions/7506 https://github.com/orgs/community/discussions/7506
- Aeolun 2y agoI have to love that someone enthusiastically announced there was going to be a fix. Like, nobody, including the original issue author is actually enthusiastic about the fix. It’s just one less papercut. I’m sure if these things were actually seen by devs they’d add a two line change to a random PR and it would be done in a few minutes.
- geysersam 2y agoI like the IDE "defined here/used here" features but I wish the page would be faster. It can be quite painful to read code on GitHub. The code view is also broken and unusably slow in some mobile browsers (Firefox) when scrolling horizontally
- mattlondon 2y agoThis sort of problem (speed) is a much overlooked secondary functionality requirement IMO. You might get amazing UX mocks and wireframes and designs etc from the UX team, and the mockups from Figma or whatever may have user-tested really well, but if there is huge latency in the real implementation then that is a usability-killer IMO, regardless of how polished the UI is.
- chrisweekly 2y agoAgreed! Performance is the most important feature.
- 0xedd 2y ago[dead]