phzbOx

I'm not bitching in any way on the existing jQuery plugins. I used (and keep using them) again and over again.. but for good javascript developers, simple plugins easily hackable is most often than not the easiest way to get the thing done.

For instance, Django provides a good authentication system.. and then lot of different ways to customize it. It's good.. but it happened to me lots of time to hack my own solution as what I wanted to do wasn't part of their initial "configuration" thingy. Some django plugins were created for that, but then again, they were hard to hack as 80% of the code base was to handle all the possible "configurations". So, basically, sometime the easiest way to get something done is just to find a snippet of code that does the minimum and code the missing part.. instead of using a huge plugin that does everything but still need to be hacked (Which is way harder the more the plugin is complex).

1- At the top, "Curate your own group" -> Create 2- There's only 2 groups on the front page.. try to create a couple more (Even if they are fake) so you can generate traction. 3- The yellow background hurt me

""" I don’t think you should refactor all your code to be sure you have strings of length 23 or less. That would obviously be ridiculous. The 50% speed increase sounds impressive, but actually the time differences I measured were insignificant until I allocated 100,000s or millions of strings – how many Ruby applications will need to create this many string values? And even if you do need to create many string objects, the pain and confusion caused by using only short strings would overwhelm any performance benefit you might get. """

So, basically, "Never create Ruby strings longer than 23 characters" is not true at all. In some specific cases, it might be true. A more accurate title might have been "Why ruby strings with more than 23 characters are handled differently." (Or something similar)

But then, it was an interesting post and I enjoyed it; so it doesn't really matter I guess.

For instance, when we have x+y=z and know only x and z, we need to reverse the equation to have y=z-x. The system was built on nodes which would propagate change (a-la events).

IMO, python's with statement with __enter__ and __exit__ looks mostly like this.

I believe it's not so much about multi-lines but more about how the standard library is designed. It's mostly imperative/OO and use really few callbacks. Thus, when you try mixing long lambdas, it feels wrong. Unlike in CS with node.js or jQuery (for example), where callbacks are really the way to go.

  # Not valid.
  my_button.on('click', lambda x: raise 'unimplemented')
  my_button.on('click', lambda _: some_var = 'clicked')

Also, I'd like to point out that "where's the patch" is really unfair. Python programmers are 'users/customers'. So, it's like if a customer asked for a feature and you'd tell her to implement it..

The goal would be to have this app open 24h/24 on a server and be able to totally use it from the browser and customize it with Javascript.

I would also be able to have a irc client (Think erc) directly in this 'editor' coded entirely in Javascript using this API. Basically, anything you could do with emacs would be possible, but directly from the browser hosted somewhere and running 24h/24.

By "Command line", the OP meant that it's easy to plugged it wherever you want it; i.e. it is not strictly an online tool.

About:

  "fascination some programmers have for tools that are cumbersome and difficult to use is unhealthy" 

Is 'grep' hard to use? What about ctrl+shift+f in Visual Studio? Which one is the most cumbersome and difficult to use? Highly subjective imo.

In fact, I think the first language is not just about giving a strong foundation but also give students the chance to find a good internship. So, with that logic, even though I enjoy hacking with Scheme, I'd feel bad to teach that to students who will try to find an internship and writing on their resumes "Scheme" while other universities students would have "C++/Java". And, please, before your argue that a language can be learned or something else, have in mind how companies recruit and parse resumes.. they often just search for a keyword. Now, one might say that you don't want to work for a company who does that, but then, you have to start somewhere in your first internship.

Thus, I like JavaScript as a first language; not because it's the easiest to learn but because I believe it gives a strong foundation but also gives students the ability to find a good internship.

But, "the leay way says to do something and iterate based on feedback" they said. So, a couple of months and iterations later, it was all redesigned with a single number: the important percent.

A trick to help focus on the important stuff is to ask: "If I ask a user that doesn't care at all about my product and is extremely busy, what should I show to make it interesting (Or convenient)?"

Which produce a 'RuntimeError: maximum recursion depth exceeded'; But that's only because my computer is not powerful enough :)

  );g=(int

  f = lambda: g();g=(int)
  f() -> 0

http://dengmao.wordpress.com/2007/01/22/vim-color-scheme-wom...

For instance, I enjoy how the same region will evolve over time depending on where you are in your main quest. At first, it's just a road to go to the temple. But as the game progress and you get more items, you can explore it in depth and discover awesome quests/items.

I agree with him/her that there's really few games out there that mimics the game mechanics of zelda. Mario 64 comes close but, for instance, miss the in depth strategy and the various items. Zelda really have unique game play and it's not just about the world of Zelda.. you could create a totally different world and still copy the game mechanics.. but lots of really successful game use only a part of zelda's game play which is on what the author argue.

In fact, it can be summarized as Zelda being the intersection between multiple 'genres'. And it's surprising that nobody copies it exactly as we all know how Zelda is a success and is popular.

  One month ago: 
  
  me: Hey, everything is alright with project X?
  boss: Yep, perfect.  
  
  Next monday, employee call me.
  employee: Can you walk me through the code.
  * me explains everything* 
  employee: Ok, just to let you know you are fire.
  me: :-/ Why?
  employee: Boss will call you
  me: ok
  
  next day, boss don't call
  I write an e-mail
  No answer
  Another email 6-7 hours later
  Boss: Sorry, I'm really busy. Calling you tomorrow  
  
  *Tomorrow*
  no call
  *next day, for a week*
  no call.
  
  I go to the office to talk to him. 
  boss: I have a meeting, I have to run. I'll call you when I get back.
  
  And he still haven't call me back, and I have no idea why I got fired.

Also, nothing about Jashkenas. Did the authors thought about asking Jash what he thought about it?

From the chapter excerpt, it shows how to include view into views.. which is already clearly explained in the todo example from the main backbone page. I mean, I've used backbone a few time, but don't consider myself an advanced or expert with backbone.js, and I've learned nothing from these excerpt chapters.

It seems more like an amateurish marketing splash page looking to test interested readers.

But then.. maybe the authors are really backbone.js experts and just not designers, and didn't one to spend money or ask a friend to design it for them (but why doing that if you're trying to sell something?!). And maybe I've just read an excerpt that I knew all about. And maybe Jash said something in the intro of the book?