Search
481 results for “develwithoutacause”
-
@westbrook Can I #SSR that with #DeclarativeShadowDom?
-
@westbrook Can I #SSR that with #DeclarativeShadowDom?
-
Playing a bit with #Preact / #JSX today and am feeling the pain of not having host elements. I've realized that because a "component" is really just a #VDOM template, there is no implicit contract around what it actually rendered.
As an arbitrary example, what if I want to set a style on a `<Foo />` component? What selector should I use for that style? I have no idea what `<Foo />` will actually generate, or even how many top-level elements it will output. The `Foo` component _must_ expose some kind of `className` or other API to provide this behavior, it's not implicit at all.
Maybe this is good because it provides stronger encapsulation. But it can also lead to bugs. If I render `<Header />` a `header` CSS selector is _probably_ right. But what if `<Header />` actually renders:
<div>
<header>...</header>
</div>Then a `header` selector isn't actually the top-level element and my style could easily be wrong.
Just some idle thoughts about the lack of host elements.
-
Playing a bit with #Preact / #JSX today and am feeling the pain of not having host elements. I've realized that because a "component" is really just a #VDOM template, there is no implicit contract around what it actually rendered.
As an arbitrary example, what if I want to set a style on a `<Foo />` component? What selector should I use for that style? I have no idea what `<Foo />` will actually generate, or even how many top-level elements it will output. The `Foo` component _must_ expose some kind of `className` or other API to provide this behavior, it's not implicit at all.
Maybe this is good because it provides stronger encapsulation. But it can also lead to bugs. If I render `<Header />` a `header` CSS selector is _probably_ right. But what if `<Header />` actually renders:
<div>
<header>...</header>
</div>Then a `header` selector isn't actually the top-level element and my style could easily be wrong.
Just some idle thoughts about the lack of host elements.
-
Playing a bit with #Preact / #JSX today and am feeling the pain of not having host elements. I've realized that because a "component" is really just a #VDOM template, there is no implicit contract around what it actually rendered.
As an arbitrary example, what if I want to set a style on a `<Foo />` component? What selector should I use for that style? I have no idea what `<Foo />` will actually generate, or even how many top-level elements it will output. The `Foo` component _must_ expose some kind of `className` or other API to provide this behavior, it's not implicit at all.
Maybe this is good because it provides stronger encapsulation. But it can also lead to bugs. If I render `<Header />` a `header` CSS selector is _probably_ right. But what if `<Header />` actually renders:
<div>
<header>...</header>
</div>Then a `header` selector isn't actually the top-level element and my style could easily be wrong.
Just some idle thoughts about the lack of host elements.
-
Playing a bit with #Preact / #JSX today and am feeling the pain of not having host elements. I've realized that because a "component" is really just a #VDOM template, there is no implicit contract around what it actually rendered.
As an arbitrary example, what if I want to set a style on a `<Foo />` component? What selector should I use for that style? I have no idea what `<Foo />` will actually generate, or even how many top-level elements it will output. The `Foo` component _must_ expose some kind of `className` or other API to provide this behavior, it's not implicit at all.
Maybe this is good because it provides stronger encapsulation. But it can also lead to bugs. If I render `<Header />` a `header` CSS selector is _probably_ right. But what if `<Header />` actually renders:
<div>
<header>...</header>
</div>Then a `header` selector isn't actually the top-level element and my style could easily be wrong.
Just some idle thoughts about the lack of host elements.
-
Playing a bit with #Preact / #JSX today and am feeling the pain of not having host elements. I've realized that because a "component" is really just a #VDOM template, there is no implicit contract around what it actually rendered.
As an arbitrary example, what if I want to set a style on a `<Foo />` component? What selector should I use for that style? I have no idea what `<Foo />` will actually generate, or even how many top-level elements it will output. The `Foo` component _must_ expose some kind of `className` or other API to provide this behavior, it's not implicit at all.
Maybe this is good because it provides stronger encapsulation. But it can also lead to bugs. If I render `<Header />` a `header` CSS selector is _probably_ right. But what if `<Header />` actually renders:
<div>
<header>...</header>
</div>Then a `header` selector isn't actually the top-level element and my style could easily be wrong.
Just some idle thoughts about the lack of host elements.
-
This change also has a side benefit of giving you full control over the `ts_project` which compiles your prerendering logic. No more awkward wrapping in #rules_prerender, much cleaner!
-
This change also has a side benefit of giving you full control over the `ts_project` which compiles your prerendering logic. No more awkward wrapping in #rules_prerender, much cleaner!
-
This change also has a side benefit of giving you full control over the `ts_project` which compiles your prerendering logic. No more awkward wrapping in #rules_prerender, much cleaner!
-
This change also has a side benefit of giving you full control over the `ts_project` which compiles your prerendering logic. No more awkward wrapping in #rules_prerender, much cleaner!
-
This change also has a side benefit of giving you full control over the `ts_project` which compiles your prerendering logic. No more awkward wrapping in #rules_prerender, much cleaner!
-
Just landed a major update to #rules_prerender yesterday. I redesigned the core component API to better express dependencies between different "slices" of a component. For example, if you only depend on the client-side JavaScript, the bundler will still find the associated CSS styles.
https://github.com/dgp1130/rules_prerender/issues/40
Really excited about the direction here! Next step is the actual documentation site.
-
Just landed a major update to #rules_prerender yesterday. I redesigned the core component API to better express dependencies between different "slices" of a component. For example, if you only depend on the client-side JavaScript, the bundler will still find the associated CSS styles.
https://github.com/dgp1130/rules_prerender/issues/40
Really excited about the direction here! Next step is the actual documentation site.
-
Just landed a major update to #rules_prerender yesterday. I redesigned the core component API to better express dependencies between different "slices" of a component. For example, if you only depend on the client-side JavaScript, the bundler will still find the associated CSS styles.
https://github.com/dgp1130/rules_prerender/issues/40
Really excited about the direction here! Next step is the actual documentation site.
-
Just landed a major update to #rules_prerender yesterday. I redesigned the core component API to better express dependencies between different "slices" of a component. For example, if you only depend on the client-side JavaScript, the bundler will still find the associated CSS styles.
https://github.com/dgp1130/rules_prerender/issues/40
Really excited about the direction here! Next step is the actual documentation site.
-
Just landed a major update to #rules_prerender yesterday. I redesigned the core component API to better express dependencies between different "slices" of a component. For example, if you only depend on the client-side JavaScript, the bundler will still find the associated CSS styles.
https://github.com/dgp1130/rules_prerender/issues/40
Really excited about the direction here! Next step is the actual documentation site.
-
@slightlyoff I use #JSON5 in a Chrome Extension I own solely to comment the manifest and it works great.
I do think the bigger issue is that JSON is a terrible configuration language (but great wire format!). We should be using #TOML, #YAML, or something else more targeted for that use case.
-
@slightlyoff I use #JSON5 in a Chrome Extension I own solely to comment the manifest and it works great.
I do think the bigger issue is that JSON is a terrible configuration language (but great wire format!). We should be using #TOML, #YAML, or something else more targeted for that use case.
-
@slightlyoff I use #JSON5 in a Chrome Extension I own solely to comment the manifest and it works great.
I do think the bigger issue is that JSON is a terrible configuration language (but great wire format!). We should be using #TOML, #YAML, or something else more targeted for that use case.
-
@slightlyoff I use #JSON5 in a Chrome Extension I own solely to comment the manifest and it works great.
I do think the bigger issue is that JSON is a terrible configuration language (but great wire format!). We should be using #TOML, #YAML, or something else more targeted for that use case.
-
@slightlyoff I use #JSON5 in a Chrome Extension I own solely to comment the manifest and it works great.
I do think the bigger issue is that JSON is a terrible configuration language (but great wire format!). We should be using #TOML, #YAML, or something else more targeted for that use case.
-
A sincere "fuck you" to #GetYourGuide (and any other app) which listed a tour fully online, let me pay and complete the transaction, and email me the result. But instead of emailing me a QR code, it emails me a link to their *native app*, forces me to install the 40 MB binary on mobile roaming data, remember the password to log in to the same one-off account made to purchase the ticket, *and then* show me the QR code to show the tour guide. Just email me the damn QR code!
This accomplishes *nothing* but adding 14 clicks, 5 - 20 minutes to the check in time (depending on how easily the user guesses their password), and requiring a mobile data connection.
-
As for what I hope would be next (keep in mind I did not play #RE2Remake or #RE3Remake): I don't think it's worth remaking #RE5 given it's general reception. I'd much rather see this team make a brand new Resident Evil game in this engine. They've clearly got a solid track record at this point and we never really got a "good" over-the-shoulder RE game after 4 (until the remakes).
I'd love to see an entirely new, from scratch experience built with these mechanics and engine as a starting point.
This does kind of put the team in the same position as the RE franchise was post-RE4, where they previously fucked it all up. However, RE4 was a very unique "lightning in a bottle" moment where it got so many things right on the first try. Now that we've had several games of bad ideas and the RE 2/3 remakes, I feel like we should have a better sense of what does and doesn't work which will hopefully lead to a better end product than RE5 was. Just what I'd like to see anyways.
-
Playing with #ESModules in #Node today and had some fun.
-
I want a #SuperSmashBros-clone where all the characters are mascots from children's cereal.
Imagine a battle royal between the #LuckyCharms leprechaun, #ToucanSam, the #Trix rabbit, and #TonyTheTiger.
-
Speaking of not writing documentation: I also prototyped a very cool idea for how to greatly simplify the developer experience of #rules_prerender *and* make it understand even more complex dependency graphs.
Still more experimenting to be done, but I'm hopeful this is a viable strategy and will be a big improvement for developers! 😁
-
Speaking of not writing documentation: I also prototyped a very cool idea for how to greatly simplify the developer experience of #rules_prerender *and* make it understand even more complex dependency graphs.
Still more experimenting to be done, but I'm hopeful this is a viable strategy and will be a big improvement for developers! 😁
-
Speaking of not writing documentation: I also prototyped a very cool idea for how to greatly simplify the developer experience of #rules_prerender *and* make it understand even more complex dependency graphs.
Still more experimenting to be done, but I'm hopeful this is a viable strategy and will be a big improvement for developers! 😁
-
Speaking of not writing documentation: I also prototyped a very cool idea for how to greatly simplify the developer experience of #rules_prerender *and* make it understand even more complex dependency graphs.
Still more experimenting to be done, but I'm hopeful this is a viable strategy and will be a big improvement for developers! 😁