lowboy

26 ms·

241.
by lowboy 13y ago
1x is only too small if you're concerned with things other than visual creative work. I would love if my Photoshop menus could scale down to leave more room for the content I'm creating.
242.
by lowboy 13y ago
Because 16:10 monitors have been phased out for 16:9.
243.
by lowboy 13y ago
What is the name of the chair?
244.
by lowboy 13y ago
Are there any others that have had success marketing to this segment? I'm sure many try.
245.
by lowboy 13y ago
Mmhmm. Like I said, that's not good enough for you and for your needs . For other people it's fine. That's important to note.
246.
by lowboy 13y ago
> But that's not anywhere close to good enough for me FTFY
247.
by lowboy 13y ago
Huh, so it can't.
248.
by lowboy 13y ago
@@n.n.n.n.n.n. isn't much worse than the version with spaces. edit: but . doesn't work for macros, as was pointed out.
249.
by lowboy 13y ago
I think most people would consider copy/paste and undo/redo to be included in "basic" text editing.
250.
by lowboy 13y ago
I like this, if there was some way of visually distinguishing submitter addition (make it lighter, italic, etc) so we know if a parenthetical is from the site or from the submitter.
251.
by lowboy 13y ago
So have I, chief. I've used heavy IDEs before with Java, and I much prefer a simpler text editor like Vim or Sublime. I tried out TS a while back. All the examples I've seen were overweight, much like classical enterprise Java. To
252.
by lowboy 13y ago
Don't get me wrong, I agree that the overall experience is important - the best language in the world would be shit if you had to use notepad.exe to develop in it. You like your IDEs and static typing and tooling, and it works for you
253.
by lowboy 13y ago
Right, but that's about a certain IDE not the language itself, regardless of whether it's TS or JS. Sublime text does that for any JS file, as does Vim with the right plugin. I bet whatever IDE you're using will do that with
254.
by lowboy 13y ago
Does Dart compile that for loop down to a regular for loop instead of the JS for..in loop? Or are there any safeguards against someone adding a property to an array (not that they should)? a = [1,2,3]; a.prop = "oops";
255.
by lowboy 13y ago
Transparent and instantaneous is my experience using grunt to watch and compile CS. It will only compile the changed file, not the entire codebase. It seems to happen instantaneously for me on file save, or at least within the time it takes
256.
by lowboy 13y ago
> "Scaling" as in: more developers, more files, more lines of code. Bigger projects. CS doesn't help with that one bit. It's just as difficult to handle as JS. Right, and that's why we have modular design pattern
257.
by lowboy 13y ago
By "autocomplete" you mean when you're writing code in an editor and you can type "fu", hit <tab> and it'll complete to "function() {}", for example? If that's the case, autocompletion exis
258.
by lowboy 13y ago
It's a bit more than syntactic sugar - as luikore said, eliminating the need for a tool like jslint is a win. Not having to worry about trailing commas, hasOwnProperty checks, semicolons, etc. is a big win. Getting rid of a shit-ton of
259.
by lowboy 13y ago
CS also saves keystrokes and makes code more readable by offering things such as: Reducing boilerplate for loop code: CS: for el, index in arr el.doThing(index) JS: for(var index=0; index < arr.length; index++) {
260.
by lowboy 13y ago
> For example, say you've got a function that ends with a for loop. CoffeeScript will actually convert that into an array allocation and return the result of the array. Simple, just return anything else, or nothing at all: myF
261.
by lowboy 13y ago
> more people use Windows and Linux than Mac OS Web developers are a small segment of all people who use computers.
262.
by lowboy 13y ago
I think this is an issue of a semantic mismatch surrounding a buzzword. A kernel "hacker" and web "hacker" have different flavours. I can see where they're coming from against certain interpretations of the word, bu
263.
by lowboy 13y ago
I think as long as you go with modular design choices, you have the best of both worlds. You apply those three steps to each component in turn, and on the system as a whole.
264.
by lowboy 13y ago
Eh, I don't find switching back and forth to be that problematic in terms of context switching. That's because CS is very similar to JS in everything but syntax. Which is also why a solid JS background is almost essential when wri
265.
by lowboy 13y ago
Any unfamiliar language is hard to read and will have seeming ambiguities. In my experience working with CoffeeScript, I've always found well-written code easy to read with no ambiguities.
266.
by lowboy 13y ago
I found it a little awkward to read at first, but that went away in a short time. I suggest giving it a proper whirl. Most people who I've introduced to CS seem to really like it.
267.
by lowboy 13y ago
I'm not sure where the idea originated that readability scales with the number of parentheses, but I wish it would hurry up and die.
268.
by lowboy 13y ago
>It also bugs the fuck out of me that CoffeeScript projects frequently end up being given a *.js extension If a project compiles down to Javascript and is intended to be used as such, a .js name suits it regardless of the source language
269.
by lowboy 13y ago
> Based on the numbers that I see, JavaScript is disliked more than ActionScript Not now: AS has an 84% dislike rate to JS' 39%.
270.
by lowboy 13y ago
Did you do some research on registrars and then find that this was the cheapest? Because this looks like an ad.

More ›