If you are going to crawl sites you better use Ferrum or Vessel because you crawl, not test.

So when should you use rbspy, and when should you use stackprof? The two tools are actually used in pretty different ways! rbspy is a command line tool (rbspy record --pid YOUR_PID), and StackProf is a library that you can include in your Ruby program and use to profile a given section of code.

The main (IMO) feature of MQTT – quality of service – doesn't make sense in our case: if a WebSocket server is down and doesn't receive broadcast messages (through HTTP/Redis/queue), it's likely not to handle client connections too.

We used testing tools that were in the same ecosystem as our backend technology stack for primrily three reasons: We owned both ends of the stack Team experience Interacting with the database

We think that, although Ruby is a great language for the backend, the view should be written in languages designed for that purpose, HTML and JavaScript.

Our app is mostly about displaying pages of static information. We crunch a lot of data to generate a single error report page.

Honeybadger isn't a single page app, and it probably won't ever be. SPAs just don't make sense for our technical requirements.

Flexbox's strength is in its content-driven model. It doesn't need to know the content up-front. You can distribute items based on their content, allow boxes to wrap which is really handy for responsive design, you can even control the distribution of negative space separately to positive space.

Flexbox is for one dimensional layout (row or column). CSS grid is for two dimensional layout.

There is one situation where iframes are (almost) required: when the contents of the iframe is in a different domain, and you have to perform authentication or check cookies that are bound to that domain. It actually prevents security problems instead of creating them. For example, if you're writing a kind of plugin that can be used on any website, but the plugin has to authenticate on another domain, you could create a seamless iframe that runs and authenticates on the external domain.

I normally try to figure out if that's a good solution for the problem before resorting to iframes. Sometimes, however, an iframe just does the job better. It maintains its own browser history, helps you segregate CSS styles if that's an issue with the content you're loading in.

Ubuntu also supports ‘snap’ packages which are more suited for third-party applications and tools which evolve at their own speed, independently of Ubuntu. If you want to install a high-profile app like Skype or a toolchain like the latest version of Golang, you probably want the snap because it will give you fresher versions and more control of the specific major versions you want to track.

Depending on what other component libraries you’ve used, you may be used to handling events by passing callback functions to component properties, or using a special event syntax – Svelte supports both, though one is usually more appropriate than the other depending on your situation. This post explains both ways.

I wouldn't use Flutter for web, mobile is good though.

It's super promising for web apps, just maybe not for web pages. I went from React to Svelte to Flutter for my current app project, and every step felt like a major upgrade.Flutter provides the best developer experience bar none, and I think it also has the potential to provide the best user experience. But probably only for PWAs, which users are likely to install anyway. Or other self-contained experiences, like Facebook games. It does have some Flash vibes, but is far more suitable for proper app development than Flash ever was while still feeling more like a normal website to the average user. It won't be the right choice for everything, but I believe it will be for a lot of things.