echoless

6 ms·

31.
by echoless 12y ago
Depends on the reasons why she was late and if they were legitimate or not.
32.
by echoless 12y ago
> Ah, you mean the flavour of the month? That's a bit unfair. There are many mature(upwards 5 years of continuous development) UI components for javascript. Charts, Visualization, Data grids, UI Binding and pretty much anything an a
33.
by echoless 12y ago
While JavaFx and QML offer a better development environment(good IDEs with refactoring support, drag-and-drop designers etc), they cannot compete with the thousands of UI (and increasingly non-UI/utility) libraries that are out there f
34.
by echoless 12y ago
For DOM performance, they are pretty much identical. Both use Chrome(each uses a different version though, usually atom-shell uses more recent versions). For performance of node.js calls, I haven't run any benchmarks, so I cannot help
35.
by echoless 12y ago
I've played around with both node-webkit and atom-shell, and I prefer atom-shell over node-webkit, due to some minor inconveniences with node-webkit. * When an error occurs in node-webkit, it loads an error page instead of simply loggi
36.
by echoless 12y ago
Turbolinks wipes off the entire DOM and replaces it with the new request's html on link navigation. So no, it is not an adequate replacement for SPAs.
37.
by echoless 12y ago
> It's isnt perhaps,99% of websites outthere arent SPAs.I'm pretty sure a majority of website you visit arent either. Currently 99% of websites are not SPAs, but I think a lot of sites will switch to SPAs in the future, since t
38.
by echoless 12y ago
I'm curious about the fate of Rails(and other frameworks like Django) in a few years, seeing that many web applications are moving to the Single-Page-Application model and the server simply acts as a rest backend. Perhaps there will st