26 Matching Annotations
  1. Jun 2024
  2. Jan 2024
  3. Sep 2023
  4. Sep 2022
    1. Thats because you have both width and padding set to one element. And by default padding is added on top of width. (Making it 100% + 2*30px of width). #header{ padding: 30px; width: 100%; } Either remove padding and add it to an inner element with no width set, or use: box-sizing: border-box; Which makes the width calculation include padding. :)
  5. Aug 2022
  6. Mar 2022
  7. Sep 2021
  8. Oct 2020
    1. There have been a number of issues opened about this, and a good deal of confusion. The docs indicate that if you mutate an object without there being a = involved, this doesn't trigger an update. But there's no mention that only assignments to certain variables trigger updates.
  9. Sep 2020
    1. This is likely not desired for ES module dependencies: Here require should usually return the namespace to be compatible with how bundled modules are handled. If you set esmExternals to true, this plugins assumes that all external dependencies are ES modules and will adhere to the requireReturnsDefault option. If that option is not set, they will be rendered as namespace imports.
  10. Jul 2020
  11. May 2020
    1. P ⇒ Q

      It may be confusing for a newcomer (or on first read-through) that the variable/predicate/condition that represents the "necessary condition" in this statement P ⇒ Q is the Q.

      One might be forgiven for incorrectly assuming that the P represents the necessary condition. That is because most of the time when one states a statement/relation/implication/etc. about a subject, the sentence/statement begins with the subject. For example, if we're explaining about a "less than" relationship, and we give x < y as an example, one would correctly assume that x is the subject here and x is the thing that is less than.

      So it may be a bit surprising to a newcomer (on first read-through) that the subject of this section — the necessary condition — is represented by the Q and not be the P.

      (Made even more confusing by the fact that the very same implication P ⇒ Q is also used to express the opposite sufficiency relationship in the very next section. I would argue that Q ⇒ P should have been used instead in exactly one of these sections to make it clearer that the subject is different and/or the relation is different, depending how you look at it.)

      Is there any reason we couldn't rewrite this to express the logical relation between P and Q with the subject first? If we let P be the subject (that is, "necessary condition" that we're illustrating/explaining), could we not rewrite this as P ⇐ Q?

      In fact, that is exactly how this relation was expressed below, in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Necessity_and_sufficiency#Simultaneous_necessity_and_sufficiency !:

      that P is necessary for Q, P ⇐ Q, and that P is sufficient for Q, P ⇒ Q

  12. Apr 2020
    1. it isn't actually -prune itself that causes this, by the way. The issue is that the or operator "short-circuits", and or has lower precedence than and. The end result is that if a file called .snapshot is encountered it will match the first -name, -prune will then do nothing (but return true), and then the or returns true since its left-argument was true. The action (eg: -print) is part of its second argument, so it never has a chance to execute.
  13. Mar 2020
  14. Feb 2020
  15. Nov 2019
    1. I'm considering this, although I'm still leaning towards not including it and I'd love to just get rid of first if it wouldn't break so many peoples tests. Newcomers to Capybara don't understand (or aren't willing to learn) the issues that all/first (and last if added) have and massively overuse them. Yes the fact that all and first now wait by default will prevent some of the new user issues/confusion, but it won't fix the non-reloadability issue.