What's the difference between Code.org and Codecademy.com ? Are they trying to achieve the same thing but in a different perspective? It looks like a lot more celebrities are on Code.org making it an enticing place to be.
Code.org seeks to 'change the wind', so to say, of programming education, to help motivate individuals to learn more about coding. Codecademy.com is one form of online education to help satisfy the needs of those who became interested in programming, such as via Code.org and the many educators and decision makers who inspire non-coders to, well, code.
You only have to do it yourself once you decide to use threads.
And there is not really a way around that. If the language mandated that all primitive operations (for whatever reasonable operation of 'primitive') were atomic, most multi-threaded programs would slow down to a crawl.
Even ignoring that, having atomic primitives is not sufficient to prevent race conditions. Things like "if balance > withdrawal {balance -= withdrawal; ...} need larger ranges of locking, and no compiler is going to tell you how large they have to be.
It's not that bad. If you go behind a building, it becomes transparent. Pretty close to Diablo. Of course it's a demo not meant to be a full blown game.
Why do we have a post about the release candidate? Is this to raise awareness for the release or something. It doesn't seem to make sense to post about all version. If we did this, Chrome browser would be nuts considering how many versions it goes through!
> It doesn't seem to make sense to post about all version.
2.0.0 is kind of a big deal. It's not just any random version.
Furthermore, projects always have trouble getting people to actually use release candidates. I can't tell you the number of times I've seen a project where two or three RCs get released, issues are fixed, and when final comes out, people complain "omg there's so many bugs." They would have been fixed for final if you'd tried the RC!
Preach it brother! The people who don't care about the RC are the ones who jump on it day 1 of the release because it's "finally ready" and then complain about the bugs.
I guess maybe because a release candidate of Ruby might be the "final" Ruby 2.0.0 and it can make gem mainteners want to check their code compatibility. Web developers have difficulties keeping their website up to date with all browser, so it can be overkill to try to keep up with release candidate of every browser.
sure... but ruby is on a yearly release cycle and i don't know about you but this does get me pretty excited. brings out the fan boy in me ;-)
also it gives me heads up that hey new release of ruby coming out soon, maybe i should go test the gems i maintain and make sure they're going to be compatible. RC2 is pretty close to p0
It seems like it'd be possible to automate gem testing for this scenario. Take the 1000 most popular gems, run the tests that come with the gem in 1.9.3. Run the tests again with the RC and see if any that succeed with the stable version fail with the RC.
Many Rubyists use Travis to do CI with their gems, and have ruby-head testing, often with allow-failures set. Here's one of mine: https://travis-ci.org/drapergem/draper
It's Ruby. Every little fucking thing is front page news, from drama to RC releases to security holes. Welcome to programming by celebrity, where what you write isn't half so important as what you write it in, and how many tweets it generates.
You should not design your website to have so many borders because a container inside a container inside another container just looks really odd. Although it may look good at first, from a fresh eye's perspective, it is very clunky.
Good job on updating your website to split the post into two columns!
Man, I love bootstrap. Not only is it pretty well design from the front end and back end. The less files that are architected are awesome, I wouldn't have thought of it on my own. The guys built it for full customization for advance programmers and dead simple for beginners. Keep up the good work!
The only disadvantage to this is that all startups are now 'lazy' and begin using bootstrap default theme colors and styles -- which makes all website look the same. I'm not sure whether I feel that we're losing creativity for people who want to play with colors or we're losing the ability to actually code up some CSS to make things pretty. (Just my opinion).
Dropping support for IE7 was a good idea. I believe that is the next browser we're killing after IE6, right? After all, who keeps versions of browser these days? I mean I lost count when Chrome updates for me -- and Firefox is on rapid release (18) now. I can't keep up remember all these numbers and browsers!
Please keep up the good work! Bootstrap is an awesome framework for the web!
I'll take the time to say thanks too, since they seem to be following this.
We've long had lots of open source infrastructure like Linux, Rails, Postgres, Apache, and so on and so forth that was very much a "by programmers, for programmers" affair. It's very nice to get some "design" infrastructure - Bootstrap has made my sites look a lot better, and I get compliments from people.
Pretty much everything in Bootstrap is gray-scale , with the exception of things with semantic function: red=error/danger, amber=caution, green=success.
The only exceptions are "primary" buttons (which was blue by default but based on the link color the last time I checked), info which is pale blue, and code samples which are pink.
I'm not in the slightest way artistic, but I feel if those (incredibly easily overriden) usages hold you back from expressing yourself with color then you're probably best not to bother and so it's a net-win either way.
In my opinion that is AWESOME that lazy startups are defaulting to basic bootstrap theme. 1) It is WAY better than the crap that a non-design oriented engineer would come up with and 2) it lays an awesome foundation for a designer to come in and make improvements. Usually engineers write the first 10,000 lines of code on a project so give them a dead simple UI framework so they don't create something horrible in it's place.
Maybe they could add support for color scheme designers to the customized version (such as kuler.adobe.com or colorschemedesigner.com, which are works of art in my opinion).
Also, some things are difficult to modify. What if I want two navbars, one with a different height than the other? Some tweaks seem pretty difficult to make.
As pointed out in the previous post, you should not rely 100% on Facebook as your Auth gateway. You should have an alternative for your users to login in case of something like this happens.
