wycats

36 ms·

301.
by wycats 14y ago
The idea of asset packaging, of course, is not innovative. Jeremy's original claim was that Rails was put on hold. Integrating an asset pipeline solution into Rails took time and commits, and providing an ecosystem-wide solution for somethi
302.
by wycats 14y ago
Jeremy, I think you know better, but you find this argument too convenient to give up. We did not "put Rails on hold". You could just look at the commit logs, but let me be more explicit. * December 23, 2008: Merge announced * March 15, 200
303.
by wycats 14y ago
> Ember looks cool, but knockout lets me ship fast and it's less "magic". I'd appreciate it if you could quantify what you mean exactly by "magic". For example, one key difference between Ember and Knockout is that Ember's binding syste
304.
by wycats 14y ago
> Yes, but even from a user's point of view I'm delighted when I use stateless web "apps". Facebook is an excellent example: There's quite a lot of AJAX-magic, but it still feels (and functions) as a stateless web site. > No silly "
305.
by wycats 14y ago
> I couldn't care less about Stateful Single-Page Applications. I'll take a stateless, curlable, crawlable (remember Google?), old-style web site any time I take it that all of your applications involve public content with minimal if an
306.
by wycats 14y ago
Just because a framework has models, views and controllers does not mean it gives them "equal weight".
307.
by wycats 14y ago
I'll take $(node).remove() over node.parentNode.removeChild(node) any day.
308.
by wycats 14y ago
IE9 doesn't run on Windows XP. IE10 won't run on Windows Vista. So it's safe to say that even with silent updates (which still won't automatically run on corporate machines with corporate IT policies that control the updates), IE8 and IE9 u
309.
Textmate 2 on Github(blog.macromates.com)
247 points by wycats 14y ago|8 comments
310.
by wycats 14y ago
> It has a run loop in an event-driven browser The "run loop" hooks into the existing browser's event loop in order to coalesce side-effects. This is exactly the same thing that the browser does when you make a number of changes to the
311.
by wycats 14y ago
You could make this a valid Ruby script without the "extra byte" problem with making it a Python script.
312.
Living High on the Hog (1650)(kernelmag.com)
4 points by wycats 14y ago|0 comments
313.
by wycats 14y ago
Ruby and JavaScript are a bit different. In Ruby, once you reach the end of a line, it is unambiguous whether the line is complete. You don't need to scan the next line to figure it out. Ruby does support a line continuation character if th
314.
by wycats 14y ago
The cycle here is pretty long: jQuery 2.0 will be released in "Early 2013". For some time (probably at least 6 months if not longer), jQuery 1.9 and 2.x will be perfectly API compatible. That means that the conditional comment approach will
315.
by wycats 14y ago
If you look at the second conditional comment, it will not be parsed as a comment in browsers without conditional comment support. In other words, it will correctly use jQuery 2.0, like any other browser without conditional comment support.
316.
by wycats 14y ago
The premise is that jQuery 1.9 and 2.0 are API-compatible, so you can do something like:  <!--[if gte IE 9]>
317.
by wycats 14y ago
Zepto is not drop in. Not even close.
318.
JQuery 2.0 Drops Support for IE6/7/8; API-Compatible with jQuery 1.9.(blog.jquery.com)
430 points by wycats 14y ago|229 comments
319.
by wycats 14y ago
This isn't directly related to your complaint, but the source_location method in Ruby 1.9 is very useful: > method(:gem).source_location => ["/Users/wycats/.rvm/rubies/ruby-1.9.3-p194/lib/ruby/site_ruby/1.9.1/rubygems.rb"
320.
by wycats 14y ago
Moving images to CSS works in some cases, but the ability to specify an inline img in HTML is very useful in general. As a thought experiment, imagine replacing all <img> tags with CSS. That's essentially what this is doing.
321.
by wycats 15y ago
Is it just me, or are there large gaps in the possible answers?
322.
by wycats 15y ago
Thank you. That is really nice :D
323.
by wycats 15y ago
The main link to Rails 4 is that we've announced that Rails 4 will drop Ruby 1.8.7 support, which means that some sort of install will be mandatory on OSX beginning with Rails 4.
324.
by wycats 15y ago
If I wasn't using Google Chrome's web developer tools I'd probably consider JavaScript to be a nightmarish corpse of a language that punishes the slightest of typos with a silent malicious grin... Only by the grace of tools is JS tame at a
325.
by wycats 15y ago
app.get is using the same facility as integration testing ( https://github.com/rails/rails/blob/master/actionpack/lib/ac... ). Check out the code that instantiates it at https://github.com/rails/rails/blob/master/railties/lib/rail...
326.
by wycats 15y ago
Having investigated this a bit, it seems like there are a number of bugs in Ruby 1.9.2 (including some crashers) that make us want to steer people to 1.9.3. All Rails core team members have running apps on the latest version of Rails, and R
327.
by wycats 15y ago
Either it's a bug or I missed something. It could be that there were fundamental bugs in Ruby 1.9.2. Again, Rails 4.0 is not out yet, even in betas. We're currently in the planning stages, with a lot of movement on master, so master is in a
328.
by wycats 15y ago
I think this is a bit disingenuous. Ruby 1.9.0 was released Christmas 2007, 1.9.1 was released in January 2009, and 1.9.2 was released August 2010. Ruby 1.9.2 was the first release that most Rubyists considered "stable". For the uninitiated
329.
Announcing the jQuery Foundation(blog.jquery.com)
115 points by wycats 15y ago|5 comments
330.
by wycats 15y ago
All of my public comments on this topic agree that this is a problem that we should fix. Are you conflating me with other people? Am I not part of "the Rails team"?

More ›