Every user gets their own preferred formatting, and linters and tools could operate on already-parsed trees
5,743 karma · joined March 2, 2011
jacob@jacobrask.net https://github.com/jacobrask http://twitter.com/jacobrask
Gothenburg, Sweden.
Every user gets their own preferred formatting, and linters and tools could operate on already-parsed trees
Then you run `git rebase -i --autosquash origin/main` instead and the commits are already in the right order.
const $ = document.querySelector.bind(document);
$('.box').hidden = true;
$('.box').hidden = false;
```
Oh how I unironically love these types of quests.
I'd honestly love to be a beginner again learning modern HTML and CSS today, it's not bad at all.
Custom Elements on the other hand are useful for attaching behavior to HTML, sort of like jQuery plugins.
Not at all sold on the frameworks promoting using Shadow DOM for every button or whatnot.
As an example of what you can use the Shadow DOM for - it works fine as the node to render a React app/component in. So if you need a couple of React components on a page to not affect each others style, you can do React.createRoot(myShadowRoot) and they’re fully encapsulated.
> With Atomic CSS, the growth of CSS is tied to the number of unique styles used, not the amount of features developers are shipping.
> For example, it’s common to reuse certain properties like flex everywhere. Rather than have these duplicated in stylesheets under different class names, we only pay that cost once. This is true for each property/value combination.
This is true in theory and when you stick to the very basic stateless utility classes. Check the CSS of any larger site using Tailwind and search for a CSS rule, you will see things like
.opacity-100 {
opacity:1
}
.hover\:opacity-100:hover {
opacity:1
}
.group\:focus-within .group-focus-within\:opacity-100 {
opacity:1
}
and that's not counting media queries, dark mode, etc. In practice, the global CSS file that you load for every single page does grow for every feature you ship, since you use more of Tailwind.The spread of standardised time and clocks had a significant negative impact on individual liberty, and people would even sabotage clocks. They failed of course, as will the opposition against the cashless society, because cash is so much worse in most aspects.
If it's something you care a lot about, rather than going the way of the Luddites and opposing eSIM and electronic payments I would suggest focusing on using technology to find new solutions to the privacy/liberty problems.
I don’t believe in quitting cold turkey and I don’t think there’s anything available to fully replace all aspects of React. We’re instead gradually transitioning our internal ecosystem to use less React-specific stuff, positioning us to migrate (or not) in the next few years.
- Move from CSS-in-JS to vanilla CSS
- Avoid React-specific libraries, both developing them internally or when selecting third-party deps
- Keep business logic out of React components whenever possible
Etc
An interesting definition of “fair” - in Sweden the principle is equal health care prioritized according to who needs or benefits most from the care, not how much you pay. If you see it from that point of view, tax is not a transaction where you pay for the services you receive. You pay for the society you receive, which includes people in general being more healthy, not just yourself.
Anyone judging Redux differently if it has a 15% or 45% market share is making decisions based on the wrong parameters anyway.
The evolution has been 2 steps forward but 1 step back. It’s how many complex systems evolve and it’s fine. Just because you see that some problems/solutions resemble what you saw 10 years ago doesn’t mean nothing was improved along the way.