I wish to define methods within the class they belong to. Using class << self demonstrates that approach clearly — we are defining methods within the actual singleton class scope.

Explicit affordances are obvious, perceptual features of an item that clue you in on how it is to be used. With explicit affordances, physical appearance and any accompanying language or text inform the user of how an object is to be used.

You might not always notice, but Material Design is constantly evolving and iterating based on research.

ts geo-metric meaning is also more obvious as the rotation axis and angle can be trivially recovered.

I like this approach more because I can scan the code that renders the Box component and easily spot that it takes two children. If the Box took any props, they'd be within the opening <Box> tag, and they would be distinct from any children props.

Sociologist Michael Warner built on this some ten years later, saying:Counterpublics are spaces of circulation in which it is hoped that the poiesis of scenemaking will be transformative, not replicative merely.Poiesis is a fancy way of talking about the art and the act of creating, inventing — and it’s closely related to technique. Consciously making a scene that others can join in with.Economist Kim Crayton’s antiracism programme, Cause a Scene speaks directly to this: she is bringing a clear set of principles to life through leadership training and sharing content to achieve “strategic disruption of the status quo in technical organizations”.Making a scene is galvanising and welcoming, dynamic and inclusive by default.

The number one problem that I see developers have when practicing test-first development that impedes them from refactoring their code is that they over-specify behavior in their tests. This leads developers to write more tests than are needed, which can become a burden when refactoring code.

Write modules that are small. Iterate quickly.

Small files are nice, but modularity is also about making D3 more fun.

Unfortunately, given how widely used concat_javascript_sources is, this required changing a lot of tests. It would be nice if we could remove some of the duplication in these tests (so that similar changes would not require updating this many tests), but that can come in another PR.

This question was asked over a year ago, but it's a good question that I recently encountered as well...

I know this is old, but I got the same error and I came here from Google, so in case someone does too, this was my solution:

we have a helpful little framework behind the page rendering that pulls code snippets from real tests out of the actual gems

Writing documentation for the new website has been fun. Yes, fun!

The Model macro literally does what our model! step did.

But so far everything brought up has just been about the relative advantages of checked exceptions, and that issue is closed. We won't do it.

Not only does it help to structure myself,

They do not maintain a to-do list (mentally or physically).

I admit, I was a bit cynical -- I mean, how much can what I scribble on the back of a used envelope really change my life?

While Trailblazer offers you abstraction layers for all aspects of Ruby On Rails, it does not missionize you. Wherever you want, you may fall back to the "Rails Way" with fat models, monolithic controllers, global helpers, etc. This is not a bad thing, but allows you to step-wise introduce Trailblazer's encapsulation in your app without having to rewrite it.

DSLs can be problematic for the user since the user has to manage state (e.g. am I supposed to call valid? first or update_attributes?). This is exactly why the #validate is the only method to change state in Reform.

Universal Links allow you to register a series of domains that are allowed to interact with an installed application. If the application is not installed, the universal link is opened with Safari, allowing you to inform the user of the existence of an application or whatever is necessary.

Implicit intents do not name a specific component, but instead declare a general action to perform, which allows a component from another app to handle it. For example, if you want to show the user a location on a map, you can use an implicit intent to request that another capable app show a specified location on a map.

Yes, you do face difficult choices (moral) but you don't care about it. All you care are the reputation bars. So... Let's kill this guy, who cares if he is innocent, but this faction needs it or I'm dead. Sounds great on paper but to be honest... you just sit there and do whatever for these reputation bars. If you won't, then you lose

Say, for instance, a hypothetical self-driving car is sold as being the safest on the market. One of the factors that makes it safer is that it “knows” when a big truck pulls up along its left side and automatically moves itself three inches to the right while still remaining in its own lane. But what if a cyclist or motorcycle happens to be pulling up on the right at the same time and is thus killed because of this safety feature?

Instead of trying to educate everyone on the complexities of copyright law, we’d rather make our intentions clear with this simple statement:

I think you want a symbol with a circle around it, like the circle around the C in ©. That way the association with the copyright symbol is clear.

Part of me thinks that open source can be more rewarding to the creators/contributors. But maybe the real contribution is the permanent addition to the tools available to humanity, and if you have the wits, you can make a decent business out of it without tainting open source.

For a sufficiently successful and industry-relevant open source project, it's possible for the main developers to earn a living e.g. by selling related consulting services.

We informed and documented. We made it easy for you to understand the problem and also to take action if you disagreed. I hope you didn’t read https://linuxmint-user-guide.readthedocs.io/en/latest/snap.html#how-to-install-the-snap-store-in-linux-mint-20. I can’t understand how it could be simpler.

Is it harder to enable it in Mint than it is to disable it in Ubuntu? Not at all. Is how to enable it better documented in Mint than how to disable it in Ubuntu? Absolutely: https://linuxmint-user-guide.readthedocs.io/en/latest/snap.html.

I wanted to use GitHub Gists which are a wonderfully low friction way of sharing code

Only folks who help package Chromium get to decide how Chromium gets packaged. This gives anyone two options: You can get involved and help package Chromium so you have a voice in the decision-making, or not.

Jbuilder gives you a simple DSL for declaring JSON structures that beats manipulating giant hash structures. This is particularly helpful when the generation process is fraught with conditionals and loops.

I tried leaking session and page data and indeed it's easy. Too easy. So I definitely agree that session data should not be readable from anywhere but the request itself.

No more waiting around for pull requests to be merged and published. No more forking repos just to fix that one tiny thing preventing your app from working.

Got a bit sidetracked into refactoring the Element visitor code, so haven't actually started on the event handler stuff per se, but that'll come soon. Element stuff is starting to feel a bit more logical and easier to follow.

Unfortunately it is not just the semantic that is broken. There are lot of things.For example if you look at some of the examples (https://flutter.github.io/samples/#/) - you can see that indeed there are some div and p tags but it is not entirely normal DOM elements. For example you can't even select text anywhere on the screen. And there are more and more little things like that.Just to be clear - Flutter for web is great, I'm happy it exists, but it is not comparable to React/Vue or Svelte.IMO Flutter for web is good to post live examples of Flutter code or maybe some last-minute-boss-request to make a web version of existing app, but for not for full-blown web app. :)

However, in the all caps example the order of importance goes Title->Actions->Description (or even the actions before the title), while in the others this order is not as evident at first glance.

One last bonus: CSS variables can be written in a way that makes it easier for human programmers to understand. If you just see hex code #93e9be, you won’t know what color it produces, while --brand-green makes clear the purpose of the variable.

An additional benefit is semantic identifiers. For example, --main-text-color is easier to understand than #00ff00, especially if this same color is also used in other contexts.

Svelte makes the pit of success larger because it hides all of this from us at compile time.

I was originally interested in figuring out how you could figure out what’s actually true online.