raggi

54 ms·

721.
by raggi 10y ago
Passwords and domain lists aren't a good answer. Explained here: https://gist.github.com/raggi/0d22757fee6eff4bb93a5731215060...
722.
Cloudbleed: Users can't fix themselves(gist.github.com)
2 points by raggi 10y ago|0 comments
723.
by raggi 12y ago
Try it over SPDY/HTTP2 and you'll have a very different experience.
724.
by raggi 12y ago
Hey Jarkko, been a while, I hope you and the other guys are very well! A few things from my view, not to take away from anything you said, just to drop in some thoughts from my angle: * If I was forced to pick favorites, the most productive
725.
by raggi 15y ago
The efficiency aspect can creep up on people easily though, regardless of language. It's the standard concern: you don't know how your code will be used in future. One example: http://tenderlovemaking.com/2011/12/05/profiling-rails-start..
726.
by raggi 15y ago
http://speakerdeck.com/u/holman/p/ruby-patterns-from-githubs... nuff said.
727.
by raggi 15y ago
Bro, you get parallel operation anyway, that Fibur.pass just added scheduler overhead. The whole point of Fibur is you don't need to use #pass!!!
728.
by raggi 15y ago
reminds me of https://github.com/raggi/typhoeus/commit/c683b7d2f0ba3fd01f9...
729.
by raggi 15y ago
Not true!, it will keep the response time interquartile range small, providing a consistent user experience!
730.
by raggi 16y ago
Since when was it not a good practice to encapsulate, abstract, and decouple?
731.
by raggi 16y ago
I wholeheartedly agree with you that the comment "No one actually writes code like this" was inaccurate and not useful for the discussion. I see people doing this exact same style of code in EventMachine in ruby, and have done for years. I
732.
by raggi 16y ago
Yeah, I had already told Yehuda about the potential concurrency issues for apps switching over to this, as fibers are stacks and stack switching can lead to concurrency issues, especially dropping in a re-ordering of the render chain like t
733.
by raggi 16y ago
It does require changes in the app, but app authors who need this kind of performance benefit will be willing to accept that hit. The solution is far better than the alternatives: - Allowing users to flush manually (people screw this up rea
734.
by raggi 16y ago
show me a christian that grok'd the entire bible before calling themselves a christian, and i'll show you a developer who reads the entire behavioral specification of a library before using it. your idea works for libraries that are small,
735.
by raggi 16y ago
no. blogs are not a substitute for documentation. ruby has been suffering this for too long. blogs have several problems: - they don't get updated - they don't get patched - they don't ship with the software - they break when the user di
736.
by raggi 16y ago
"Fossil doesn't have any concept of patch management via email, which is fairly central to most OSS projects I'm involved with." Don't you use 3 sites, one you write that try to optimise away from this ghetto process? I had a look at your
737.
by raggi 16y ago
Except for in default configuration, with a user account that's passworded, there's this massive at-console exploit that requires no specialist knowledge other than very basic shell knowledge. cmd+s on boot.
738.
by raggi 16y ago
Guys he's only pushing 120mb/s over the loopback. That's totally lame. Sorry, but there's something wrong in the software stack. All the comments about hardware, caches, blah blah are just FUD. Locked to a single CPU, he should be pushing w
739.
by raggi 16y ago
single. user. mode.
740.
by raggi 17y ago
I use git more than hg, but neither bothers me, and I do use both. There's one major workflow that's significantly easier in hg, which is to generate a local patchfile (amazingly clunky in git sometimes, despite being actually kinda simple