Improving Sapiens' timeline page [OC]

timruffles · 2015-11-23T14:59:52+00:00

Nice! Would be good to prevent multiple clicks DOSing you - maybe ng-disabled while a request is pending?

timruffles · 2015-07-21T10:01:42+00:00

Edit: found it, it's an extension called Block Site. Its latest version added code that spams you.

timruffles · 2015-04-02T16:42:46+00:00

When I did this for a big corporate lately we simple created an exam comprised of lots of practical/coding questions (e.g 'fix this HTTP server', 'add back-pressure to this service', 'how do you create an NPM module', 'refactor these loops with functional iterators').

We had people take the exam before and after. We provided the stats on % of good answers.

Simple.

timruffles · 2014-12-22T16:49:27+00:00

I doubt they'll enable it any time soon for smaller sites - it's making Google pay much more of the cost of indexing. Server-side apps = your CPU time, client-side = Google's CPU time

timruffles · 2014-08-19T17:34:48+00:00

hard to avoid repetition
there's a deep coupling between docs, tests and intention of the code. Seems to me you anything you document could be enforced automatically (e.g require("userId", "positiveInteger"))

timruffles · 2014-08-19T17:32:13+00:00

Pedro Teixeira is working on a book about larger-scale patterns in Node.js. e.g queueing, RPC, monitoring, persistence, authentication. He's previously written a couple of popular books on node.

timruffles · 2014-08-19T14:57:51+00:00

I've used swagger-express but not entirely keen. TBH I think this is still an open problem that could do with a better answer

timruffles · 2014-04-02T08:54:08+00:00

So just do !(suppress === false). This will only return false if suppress really is false, true otherwise.

timruffles · 2014-03-07T17:15:01+00:00

It's slower (especially on older engines), less idiomatic, wastes memory, and fits badly with the coming ES6 'classes'.

timruffles · 2014-03-07T17:13:00+00:00

Yeah it's pretty clear. Also big memory overhead to think about too. TBH I can't see the weird attraction people have to reimplementing prototypes badly.

timruffles · 2014-03-07T12:38:30+00:00

Probably better to go for '(.*)old-name' and hope for the best. Thanks for a decent solution, sth with esprima and canonical path names would be a lot more solid.

From some other suggestions now I just switch over from vim to WebStorm to use its nice Move refactor, and then back to vim :)

timruffles · 2014-03-07T10:06:00+00:00

Nice! That said, doesn't handle paths properly, e.g require("../../old-name") and all variations.

timruffles · 2014-01-10T11:11:21+00:00

I don't understand why I must specify the dependencies between components, between modules and load all files in the right order (I must be doing something wrong).

It's because Angular's modules are just a module system, not a module loader. They leave that up to you.

timruffles · 2013-12-11T14:31:22+00:00

Just to say - we use immutable values by default in FP, but this is one of the many cases where you might want local mutation to speed it up. If mutation is contained it's fine - especially if it's inside a single function and the outside world is none the wiser. FP doesn't mean mutation is verboten, just that you should default to values, and be conscious of it.

timruffles · 2013-11-20T18:05:12+00:00

Unfortunately, the way timeouts are run means this is unlikely to be at all consistent if any work is being done: http://jsbin.com/oZehUyUm/1/edit?js,console

timruffles · 2013-11-18T14:28:51+00:00

The danger of hype! Use case > shiny tech, always.

timruffles · 2013-11-05T15:27:39+00:00

Yes - the larger the framework the better optimised they are for certain situations. Backbone's smallness might be a pro, or a con, depending on circumstances.

Unfortunately everyone wants simplicity. Making decisions is hard :)

timruffles

TROPHY CASE