|
caiman posted:I work the opposite way. I run Linux Mint natively and I run Windows in Virtualbox. Linux is for all my development (and personal use), and Windows is strictly for Photoshop and IE testing. This is what I'd do if it wasn't for games.
|
#
¿
Oct 8, 2014 15:49
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 20, 2024 03:05 |
|
|
fuf posted:How do you share files between the two? This is my only worry. Do I have to sync two directories somehow, or can they share? I rarely have a need to, but there's several ways. The way I always do it is to simply copy and paste. If you need something more robust, you can do a network share between them, or VMWare/Virtualbox both have built-in ways of sharing a folder that I don't know much about as I've never messed with it.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 8, 2014 17:08
|
|
|
Lumpy posted:Yep. I love vim. I certainly don't see people who haven't gone up the learning cliff understanding, but unless an editor / IDE has a vim mode that fully implements vim, I don't want it. I used vim exclusively for years. I'm glad I moved on!  I can certainly see why someone wouldn't want to though. It's a lot of work to learn it, and then a lot more work to learn something else and make it do everything you want it to.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 11, 2014 17:54
|
|
|
fuf posted:Why'd you switch away from vim Thermopyle? What do you use now? I'm always just wanting to try something new, that's all. I had the same jjjjjjjjkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkk problem, but it didn't take me long to break that habit. I've went through several editors since then, but nowadays I'm using PyCharm. If you're only doing web stuff, its equivalent would be WebStorm.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 11, 2014 19:40
|
|
|
Whalley posted:Yeah, every single time I find something to "replace" SublimeText I just wind up frustrated that the only thing Sublime doesn't have is a one-click "run code" button; it's just an amazing editor, and I use method collapses/tab shortcuts all. the. loving. time. Atom looks kinda nice, but not nice enough to make me want to switch. One day I might fork out money for WebStorm, or maybe finally make the switch over to NetBeans that I've been considering since forever, but honestly, I doubt it. I don't think they have a Community Edition of WebStorm, but they do for PyCharm...which is mostly a superset of WebStorm. The Community Edition is free.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 11, 2014 23:02
|
|
|
revmoo posted:I am going to be building a drop-down menu with a lot of 'stuff' in it, similar to the Amazon dropdown menus. I'm almost certain that I want to build it from scratch. Any suggestions on articles or good writeups on the process? http://bjk5.com/post/44698559168/breaking-down-amazons-mega-dropdown
|
|
#
¿
Oct 21, 2014 22:57
|
|
|
Don't disable pinch-to-zoom if you can't be sure you've covered your bases with a responsive design. Otherwise, disable it because your site looks and works like a native app and pinch-to-zoom in native apps doesn't exist and will be loving irritating.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 28, 2014 20:00
|
|
|
Some people getting mad about zooming in this thread.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 29, 2014 20:21
|
|
|
I like frameworks because the whole css/html/js/different browsers/screen sizes/blahblahblah web environment is poo poo and I don't want to deal with it. A framework will let me put out something that looks decent until the project gets to the point we can hire some insane person that actually enjoys dealing with the whole toxic mess. I certainly get why it's irritating to expect someone to do a totally custom design, "but in this framework we're already using".
|
|
#
¿
Nov 11, 2014 00:03
|
|
|
Can anyone recommend some good reading on information architecture? I've got zero background in the subject and I'm kind of stumped about how to ... information architect ... a somewhat-complex site I'm thinking about.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 15, 2014 02:32
|
|
|
Kobayashi posted:but as a discipline it hasn't been the hot thing in quite some time. By this do you mean that there's something newer/better I should be looking at or just that most everything that can be said about it has been said?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 15, 2014 03:53
|
|
|
Kobayashi posted:Peter Morville's "Information Architecture for the Web" is the canonical starting point: Maluco Marinero posted:http://uxmastery.com/practical-ia/ Got all these. Thanks!
|
|
#
¿
Nov 15, 2014 19:09
|
|
|
In line with my earlier comment about Bootstrap and the like being what I need to get something decent looking out quick (given that I really don't like frontend web dev) and then if the project gets to the point I can get someone who actually enjoys this stuff... Anyone have anything good or bad to say about working with the SmartAdmin template/theme/doodad? I may just do it from scratch, but it would be very easy to convince myself to just use that thing. I just need to come up with something professional looking to show someone.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 18, 2014 02:52
|
|
|
I've never used public wifi that approached the good bandwidth and latency I get out of a decent 3g or 4g connection.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 18, 2014 23:29
|
|
|
Rant follows. So I'm wanting to use Facebook's Flux and React on a project. I'm part way in to it and using RequireJS. I haven't used Flux before, so I'm learning as I go. I go to download their Dispatcher.js file. Oops, Facebook uses Browserify and the ES6 class statement. I dig around for a bit and realize I've got to clone the repo and do an npm install to build a de-sugarified version. Good to go now... Oh wait, it also depends on invariant.js. Ok, I'll just add that to my RequireJS-style require statement. Oh no, won't work, Dispatcher.js and invariant.js both use CommonJS-style require and module.exports. I've got to wrap them with RequireJS's code for handling CommonJS modules. I loving hate javascript tooling and modules and bleh. The people who came up with this house of cards should be ashamed. I could have switched everything over to using browserify, but man this is just a constant on-going pain. I don't really want to use browserify anyway, as this is a complex single page app and there's like 2MB of js that I don't want to load all at once. I'm not sure if it's one of those things where it's irritating because I don't do it enough and I'd think the same thing about...say...python's import statement, if I wasn't really familiar with python.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 30, 2014 00:15
|
|
|
If you make a website with one of those, I'm going to stalk you in real life and wait for the opportune time to push you down the stairs.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 11, 2014 22:21
|
|
|
Brave GNU World posted:Use Webpack, make a common bundle and whatever other bundles you need, then load the extra bundles depending on the route or whatever, here's a handy guide by one of the facebook/instagram guys: https://github.com/petehunt/webpack-howto I just gave in and used browserify. Thanks for that guide though, I might switch to webpack. I considered it before I started using browserify but browserify is simpler and seems to have better docs (because its simpler) and I was already irritated with the whole thing...
|
|
#
¿
Dec 17, 2014 18:16
|
|
|
fuf posted:Can someone explain how the moving stars background on this site works? Is that a video file or some clever animation or what? I can't work it out. Unrelated, but that site scrolls like poo poo for me in Chrome 40.0.2214.45 beta-m (64-bit) on Windows.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 3, 2015 18:56
|
|
|
So, what do I need for a web app with paid accounts? I mean, the technical side is no problem, but I have no clues about credit card processing. Surely there's services that handle that, that I can communicate with via an API or some such poo poo, I just don't know what to look for to find something good. It's a django backend served off of heroku right now if for some extremely stupid reason that matters.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 5, 2015 23:55
|
|
|
Wow, Stripe is sweet stuff. I mean, I've got a whole hour (I'm an expert!) of Googlin' under my belt and it certainly seems like there's close to zero reasons to use other payment processors unless you can work out the convoluted math to figure out fees and they're significantly lower for some other processor.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 6, 2015 00:53
|
|
|
Withnail posted:Sorry this isn't a technical question, but when did the de facto web re-design turn into massive images that you have to scroll through to get to any actual content? Am I having a senior moment? It works for the right type of site that is more about advertising something in a memorable way than a site that's about serving you content. I agree it's overused for the latter type. Web design goes through these stages where a trend comes along and then everyone tries to shoehorn it into everything.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 8, 2015 15:22
|
|
|
syrup posted:React is great for small projects because it's just so drat easy to use. It took all of an afternoon to learn React well enough to be dangerous, which is dramatically less time than it took to learn either Angular or Ember. It's missing some of the natural structure of either Angular or Ember, however, so I tend to prefer it for projects I'm not intending to have to revisit every day for months or years. Flux helps with this a lot. Karthe posted:I'm getting back into web design after a 7-8 year hiatus. My god, I knew things had changed but after reading the OP and talking to a couple friends it's obvious that I'm going to have to toss out all of my old knowledge and start over. Frameworks, CSS preprocessors, HTML5, grid-based layouts...I feel like I'm in way over my head. Just pick something and learn it. You're going to want to learn a bunch of different frameworks anyway, and once you get familiar with how stuff fits together, it's pretty simple to pick up the next framework, and then the next is even easier, etc. Personally, I'd start with React as it has a small API and is easy to learn. Look in to Flux to make React more powerful and manageable for larger projects. Move on to whatever after that.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 24, 2015 18:19
|
|
|
hayden. posted:I use PHP in a procedural fashion for all my projects because my goal is to "just make it work" and not really caring whether it's a beautiful example of coding craftsmanship. You might realize this already, but the reasons for using modern development practices are many and craftsmanship is a side effect of those reasons, not the goal.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 25, 2015 03:20
|
|
|
Aghahalskjslk. 20 minutes trying to figure out why this css file wasn't loading. Turns out that "stylehseet" is not the same as "stylesheet", but it sure as hell looks like the same word.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 3, 2015 17:47
|
|
|
Karthe posted:Are there any database hosting services that will help me to quickly get an API service up and running for cheap/free? I want to start practicing development with AngularJS but I'm feeling overwhelmed since I also feel like I have to simultaneously learn something like the Django REST Framework first before I can proceed. I'm just looking for something I can use in development to auth against and store data. Once I get comfortable with the Angular I figure I can then move on to Django and learn that at my leisure. I've never used it, but I think I've heard people using Firebase for something like that.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 5, 2015 17:43
|
|
|
enthe0s posted:So I've come to the realization that I've been doing very modern front-end development for over a year now (just html, css, and javascript with jQuery and some Angular thrown in) and I'm now working at a .NET shop as a full-stack dev. I'm currently brushing up on my C# since I haven't touched Java for 2 years, but I'm wondering (and correct me if I'm wrong), why do people build websites with .NET when there are javascript frameworks that accomplish the same thing nowadays? I've never really looked into .NET until recently, and it seems like it's just handling the back and forth of data between client and database, which is what Angular, Backbone, Ember, etc. do. People don't use javascript because its good. They use javascript because the browser forces them to.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 19, 2015 02:27
|
|
|
revmoo posted:There's a bit of a current trend to shrink server-side code down to the bare minimum (auth/permissions) and expose a api for SPA apps built with frameworks to consume, and do all the application logic in the browser. This actually works for a lot of situations and I don't have an issue with it, but you certainly can't build everything in this way. This is the way I've been doing things. I like it a lot. Since you can't get all of the logic onto the server or onto the client no matter which strategy you use, I've lately preferred to push as much as possible to the client as it makes for a more modern-feeling application. It also helps with having a clear separation of concerns. If I could use almost any other modern language (C#/Java/python/ruby/etc) on the client side I would, but we're stuck with javascript. I mean, javascript isn't poo poo, but it's not the greatest either. On the other hand, a lot of the pain of client side development comes from the clusterfuck of integrating js/html/css. No module system. Asynchronous actions aren't great. Etc. Those are all less directly javascripts fault and more historical artifacts that other languages would also probably suffer from. Thermopyle fucked around with this message at 17:13 on Feb 19, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Feb 19, 2015 17:07
|
|
|
enthe0s posted:Thanks for the replies everyone (especially v1nce). If it wasn't already apparent, I'm still fairly fresh in the web dev world (less than 2 years), so I've never had to deal with a lot of the older ways of doing web dev, so I was looking to understand what trade offs were being made from using .NET vs. the modern JS frameworks I've only used so far. Oh, don't miss this thread: http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3701595
|
|
#
¿
Feb 19, 2015 19:22
|
|
|
Data Graham posted:wall of text Pretty much everything can be fine if used properly. Except for Cold Fusion. I'm not sure anyone can tell you anything useful without you asking questions that are less wide-ranging. I can tell you that all of those bullet points are just bullshit. Almost every point is the equivalent of Ford vs Chevy arguments. This is not a person you want to be working with.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 3, 2015 18:27
|
|
|
The amount of time you should continue to work with this guy is equal to the amount of time you can find a new job. You will not be able to change his mind, and even if you did he's still a lovely person to work with.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 3, 2015 19:34
|
|
|
Data Graham posted:Yeah, unfortunately this is my business partnership, not my day job. Trust me, I've changed day jobs enough times in pursuit of coding nirvana, and what I'm doing right now is as close to that as I've ever been. This is not a good business environment, you should still get out or resign yourself to a business built on a poor technical foundation because your partner is clueless.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 3, 2015 20:04
|
|
|
Data Graham posted:But if I have real things I can point to as reasons why the world is moving away from such platforms, rather than just my gut feelings and personal experiences, I have more of a possibility of making it stick. If you are representing this fellow correctly, as an FYI I just want to say this has never and will never work with this type of engineer. You have zero chance of convincing him. Zero. I mean, I know you're saying you don't want advice on how to deal with the "social" side of this, but really you're just spinning your (and our) wheels. Either leave the company, force him out of the position to make decisions on this stuff, or suck it up and deal with it.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 4, 2015 23:44
|
|
|
Funking Giblet posted:just download the js file and store it. If I can't do this, or if I can't use npm to install it, 9 times out of 10 I'll just find an alternative to using it. I hate messing with this poo poo.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 10, 2015 17:15
|
|
|
iwannabebobdylan posted:I'm wondering what the best tool, or the proper framework, would be for this scenario: I doubt there's a single thing that does that out of the box. You'll have to learn a lot of stuff to build this with JS, HTML, and some backend like Django. Also, there's lots of sites that provide the specific example you give.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 24, 2015 04:41
|
|
|
My Rhythmic Crotch posted:One guy was particularly against anything to do with DHCP or ethernet lol, what a goddamn stupid thing to take a position on.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 27, 2015 02:43
|
|
|
The Wizard of Poz posted:On a sidenote, Codrops has become my new favourite website: http://tympanus.net/codrops/ Yeah, codrops always makes me mad I don't have any sites it makes sense to use their effects on.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 2, 2015 17:48
|
|
|
huhu posted:I've been playing around with HTML, Bootstrap, CSS, and JavaScript for a few weeks now. I've realized that maintaining my website with a header and footer that has to be updated per page is pretty annoying so it looks like I'm going to invest my time in learning PHP next. What else would you guys recommend investing my time in next to learn? If you don't have other factors forcing you in to using PHP (like an existing code base) don't waste your time on PHP. I mean, lots of places use it because of historical reasons, but it's a poo poo language and there's no reason to learn it if you're just wanting to learn something for self-improvement. Any of these would be a superior choice for server-side web stuff: Python, Java, C#, JS. I very hesitantly included js there. Thermopyle fucked around with this message at 19:12 on Apr 6, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Apr 6, 2015 19:10
|
|
|
The Dave posted:If you have a pretty simple static site though is there really any problems with learning php includes to make it a little more templated? It depends on your goal. If you want to learn something good/useful/educational/makes-you-better-at-programming/isn't-stupid-and-full-of-horrors, then there's much better choices. If you just want to shovel out a site as fast as possible and don't care about bad programming habits instilled by PHP itself and all the horrible PHP tutorials, then no, there's nothing wrong with it.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 6, 2015 19:31
|
|
|
Really, the band of user goals/abilities/preferences that should just use PHP is extremely narrow. There's lots of static site generators for other not-bad languages. I was just looking at Pelican for python last week.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 6, 2015 19:35
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 20, 2024 03:05 |
|
|
Parrotine posted:Check this out fellas, it's a pretty ingenious piece of web design software I found online: It's been discussed in this thread on and off over the past couple of years. Use the forums search with this threadid to find some conversation.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 7, 2015 19:07
|
|