The question is similar but its in a Rails context. The solutions would answer my question, but I'm almost certain that he could probably leverage Arel to solve his problem. The question I posted was designed purely as a Ruby question so that it was easier to search for. You might want to suggest an edit of the title of his question because it didn't show up when I searched for a solution to my problem.

It seems to me (N.b. what do I know about this? Nothing!) that the best solution would be to tweak the 'Change Password' process so that it also updates the 'Passwords and Keys'>Passwords>Login folder's properties.

We human beings pride ourselves on our ability to reason, but the truth is we use our brains nine times out of ten to justify what our gut wants, not what is rational to do.

Seeing what you want to see, and failing to understand the why and the how

In everyday usage, MST is often referred to as Mountain Time (MT) or the Mountain Time Zone. This can add a bit of confusion as the term Mountain Time does not differentiate between standard time and Daylight Saving Time, so Mountain Time switches between MST and MDT in areas that use DST during part of the year.

Now consider we want to handle numbers in our known value set: const KNOWN_VALUES = Object.freeze(['a', 'b', 'c', 1, 2, 3]) function isKnownValue(input?: string | number) { return typeof(input) === 'string' && KNOWN_VALUES.includes(input) } Uh oh! This TypeScript compiles without errors, but it's not correct. Where as our original "naive" approach would have worked just fine. Why is that? Where is the breakdown here? It's because TypeScript's type system got in the way of the developer's initial intent. It caused us to change our code from what we intended to what it allowed. It was never the developer's intention to check that input was a string and a known value; the developer simply wanted to check whether input was a known value - but wasn't permitted to do so.

which looks like complete nonsense if you don't really know what's going on

There is always a way to work around that by doing expr as unknown as T, but it stops people making basic errors.

Search Terms:

Noticed that with 100+ s, I am not alone here. There are definitely a lot of devs wanting this feature. So I took some time out and decided to give this a go myself. I have created a PR for the same

The Simplified Spelling Board of the early 1900s in the United States made gauge one of its targets in the early 1920s, urging the replacing of au with a to yield gage. From Simplified Spelling Board, Handbook of Simplified Spelling (1920): Principles Adopted Its [the Board's] recommendations, accordingly, have been based on the following principles : 1) When current usage offers a choice of spellings, to adopt the shortest and simplest. EXAMPLES : blest, not blessed ; catalog, not catalogue; center, not centre; check, not cheque or checque; gage, not gauge; gram, not gramme; honor, not honour; license, not licence; maneuver, not manoeuvre; mold, not mould; plow, not plough; quartet, not quartette; rime, not rhyme; tho, not though; traveler, not traveller.

What happens when you look it up in a dictionary rather than as a phrase in Google? Google just catalogues other people's [mis-]uses

eem intent on building new institutions and traditions rather than maintaining old ones.

that's why I bolded "same column" with the or query. I can delete the comment altogether, but thought it would be helpful for people perusing "or" query SO questions.

There is currently no standard for transporting instances of JSON text within a stream protocol

For user-contributed data that's freeform and unstructured, use jsonb. It should perform as well as hstore, but it's more flexible and easier to work with.

The shell is responsible for expanding variables.

So long as the filters are only using GET requests to pull down links, there’s nothing fundamentally wrong with them. It’s a basic (though oft-ignored) tenet of web development that GET requests should be idempotent; that is, they shouldn’t somehow change anything important on the server. That’s what POST is for. A lot of people ignore this for convenience’s sake, but this is just one way that you can get bitten. Anyone remember the Google Web Accelerator that came out a while ago, then promptly disappeared? It’d pre-fetch links on a page to speed up things if you clicked them later on. And if one of those links happened to delete something from a blog, or log you out… well, then you begin to see why GET shouldn’t change things. So yes, the perfect solution to this is a 2-step unsubscribe link: the first step takes to you a page with a form on it, and that form then POSTs something back that finalizes the unsubscribe request.

Two step unsubscribe, where the link in the email goes to a webpage with a prominent “click here to unsubscribe” button is often a good thing for unsubscription. It also gives people an option to not unsubscribe, when they click on the wrong link, or hit “return” with the wrong link focused, in a mail inadvertently, which isn’t that unusual in link-laden emails.

Arguably any link that performs such an action via GET is fundamentally broken. A proper unsubscribe should direct to a page with a form that requires a POST submission. (Of course, in the real world, few things are proper.)

That's it! Just replace let! with let_it_be. That's equal to the before_all approach but requires less refactoring.

That technique works pretty good but requires us to use instance variables and define everything at once. Thus it's not easy to refactor existing tests which use let/let! instead.

Looking deeper, you can see a large amount of issues open, bugs taking months to fix, and pull requests never seem to be merged from outside contributors. Apollo seems unfocused on building the great client package the community wants.

This sort of behaviour indicates to me that Apollo is using open-source merely for marketing and not to make their product better. The company wants you to get familiar with Apollo Client and then buy into their products, not truly open-source software in my opinion. This is one of the negatives of the open-core business model.

It’s fun but when would we ever use things like this in actual code?When it’s well tested, commented, documented, and becomes an understood idiom of your code base.We focus so much on black magic and avoiding it that we rarely have a chance to enjoy any of the benefits. When used responsibly and when necessary, it gives a lot of power and expressiveness.

Give the same task to a junior developer, and they might code it faster because they do not think twice while reading a requirement. Their approach is more like converting English to Java (or whatever programming language they use).

____

Ok I'll reopen until the culprit is found

Happy Third Birthday #24728!

On existing projects, consider the global effort to change from origin/master to origin/main. The cost of being different than git convention and every book, tutorial, and blog post. Is the cost of change and being different worth it?

Personally, I like having Redis as a dependency as most of my current applications use two Redis instances; persistent store and volatile.

Average Lifespan of IT Systems in Higher Education

Disclaimer: This article is being regularly updated with the best recommendations up to date, take a look at a Changelog section.

Note: Instead of storing a user’s ID in the session cookie you could store a JWT, but I’m not sure what that buys you. However, you may be using specific JWT claims that make this worthwhile.

For me the diagrams make it easier to talk about what the tests do without getting bogged down by how they do it.

When mocking is deemed profitable:

I've seen (and fixed) Ruby code that needed to be refactored for the client objects to use the accessor rather than the underlying mechanism, even though instance variables aren't directly visible. The underlying mechanism isn't always an instance variable - it can be delegations to or manipulations of a class you're hiding behind a facade, or a session store with a particular format, or all kinds. And it can change. 'Self-encapsulation' can help if you need to swap a technology, a library, an object specification, etc.

Also, Sandi Metz mentions this in POODR. As I recall, she also advocates wrapping bare instance variables in methods, even when they're only used internally. It helps avoid mad refactoring later.

But sure, go ahead and enforce self-encapsulation if you like; it makes it easier to do memoization or whatever later on.

Programmers should be encouraged to understand what is correct, why it is correct, and then propagate.

Thanks, this was just what I was looking for! This is a perfect appropriate use of instance_eval. I do not understand the nay-sayers. If you already have your array in a variable, then sure, a.reduce(:+) / a.size.to_f is pretty reasonable. But if you want to "in line" find the mean of an array literal or an array that is returned from a function/expression — without duplicating the entire expression ([0,4,8].reduce(:+) / [0,4,8].length.to_f, for example, is abhorrent) or being required to assign to a local, then instance_eval option is a beautiful, elegant, idiomatic solution!!

If you do it really right, you’ll find yourself following, not leading because the team culture gets bigger than any one person.

Another problem was the ambiguity of RFC 3066 regarding the generative syntax. The idea of "language-dash-region" language tags was easy enough to grasp; most users didn't read RFC 3066 directly or consider the unstated-but-realized implication that other subtags might sometimes occur in the second position.

@7alhashmi: Yes, e.g. the 100 comes from the feature_values table

Your attempt should work. There is a mismatch in column name in your query though. The query uses col2 but the table is defined with col1.

One way to look at your current situation is that you're not paying them enough to tell you the gory details, not that you're not knowledgeable enough.

Because constants in Ruby aren't meant to be changed, Ruby discourages you from assigning to them in parts of code which might get executed more than once, such as inside methods.

makes your app inaccessible to users if JavaScript fails or is disabled (which happens more often than you probably think).

or simply install the package to devDependencies rather than dependencies, which will cause it to get bundled (and therefore compiled) with your app:

But more so, external style cannot be applied to a subsection of a web page unless they force it into an iframe, which has all sorts of issues of it's own which is why external CSS is usually ignored. Inline CSS is often stripped by the tag strippers who don't want you turning things on or off... and media queries shouldn't even play into it since the layout should be controlled by the page it's being shown inside (for webmail) or the client itself, NOT your mail.

So even if it works for you, you won't know where it breaks.

MJML has been designed with responsiveness in mind. The abstraction it offers guarantee you to always be up-to-date with the industry practices and responsive. Email clients update their specs and requirements regularly, but we geek about that stuff - we’ll stay on top of it so you can spend less time reading up on latest email client updates and more time designing beautiful email.

Write less code, save time and code more efficiently with MJML’s semantic syntax.

Also cross-compatibility with mail clients can be hairy, so you should see what the industry experts are doing.

As a conclusion, I’d say that Flexbox in an email unfortunately causes more troubles than it helps solving.

I don't believe the sprockets and sprockets-rails maintainers (actually it's up to the Rails maintainers, see rails/rails#28430) currently consider it broken. (I am not a committer/maintainer on any of those projects). So there is no point in "waiting for someone else to fix" it; that is not going to happen (unless you can change their minds). You just need to figure out the right way to use sprockets 4 with rails as it is.

This is definitely not the place to report bugs related to sass, rails, or sprockets. Each project has it's own issue tracker (not on SO)

can you remove the not a bug label considering that PaperTrail is creating this empty versions even when :updated_at is an ignored attribute?

theodicy

(Yes, I realize from a technical, end-user perspective this really doesn't matter.)

We are are continuing our commitment to creating our games that are free and widely accessible anyone that is curious by making our game files available under Creative Commons license BY–NC–SA 4.0. That means we will continue offering a full, free print-and-play kit for Pax Pamir, and later this campaign, John Company! Anyone can use, remix, and share the game, so long as they do not use it for commercial purposes. 

A good heuristic is to not trust the libraries you did not write either.

Of course you must not use plain-text passwords and place them directly into scripts. You even must not use telnet protocol at all. And avoid ftp, too. I needn’t say why you should use ssh, instead, need I? And you also must not plug your fingers into 220 voltage AC-output. Telnet was chosen for examples as less harmless alternative, because it’s getting rare in real life, but it can show all basic functions of expect-like tools, even abilities to send passwords. BUT, you can use “Expect and Co” to do other things, I just show the direction.

But in all this incongruous abundance you'll certanly find the links to expect It's just what is wanted: the tool, which is traditionally used to communicate automatically with interactive programs. And as it always occurs, there is unfortunately a little fault in it: expect needs the programming language TCL to be present. Nevertheless if it doesn't discourage you to install and learn one more, though very powerful language, then you can stop your search, because expect and TCL with or without TK have everything and even more for you to write scripts.

The question talks about stdout but the title mentions stdin. I think the title is wrong.

The game is lame and the main gimmick of writing stuff is being shat on with the horrendous gameplay. If you have a very unique formula, don't try to change it.

This is hard because Apple does not want you to and a failed installation might render the ipad useless.

Then who is responsible for the actual rendering?

Although echo "$@" prints the arguments with spaces in between, that's due to echo: it prints its arguments with spaces as separators.

It seems inelegant to me to split this into two different modules, one to include, the other to extend.

include adds instance methods, extend adds class methods. This is how it works. I don't see inconsistency, only unmet expectations :)

“Who cares? Let’s just go with the style-guide” — to which my response is that caring about the details is in the heart of much of our doings. Yes, this is not a major issue; def self.method is not even a code smell. Actually, that whole debate is on the verge of being incidental. Yet the learning process and the gained knowledge involved in understanding each choice is alone worth the discussion. Furthermore, I believe that the class << self notation echoes a better, more stable understanding of Ruby and Object Orientation in Ruby. Lastly, remember that style-guides may change or be altered (carefully, though!).

This is a new version of the game and it's actually worse than the one I used to play as a child. Puzzles have been removed, pathfinding is buggier than I remember it to be and you can't aqcuire a specific item at the beginning of the game. It's definitely not worth buying, even for nostalgia's sake.

I was almost immediately deflated. This is a cut-down reskin of a 3 year old game from the same company.

Keep it simple.

It's a matter of readability I guess.

On the other hand, you state that a certain thing behaves_like a shared example group.

Not really sure who the audience is... the puzzles are a bit too difficult for kids but won't tax adults very much at all--some bare bones hidden object, match-3 and peg hopping.

I would love to ask devs what the ****. It used to be a not bad puzzler with crappy movement, but it had to be at least a bit interesting if my Steam counter shows 5 hours. Now it is a crap.There is nothing left from the previous version - except the fact that the main character is a robot. Earlier the game looked like a bad retro, and now it looks like sweet flood. The robot moves extremely slowly now and, what's worse, it seems that it has the same levels as a game that used to be called "Abrix for kids".Achievements were reset and the new ones are broken, so it is enough to make a step to achieve 1000 steps, move a block one to get a 1000 moved blocks achievement and same with destroying blocks. I think it is even better this way. No one has to play it more than few minutes.It is sad what happened with Abrix. Avoid it.

Ultimately, Shelter Generations relies on your capacity to dig into its subtleties. On that overt level it's an obtuse and obviously indie game, and it's really quite demanding of the player; it asks them to figure their own way through the game, and it asks them to really commit to an emotional connection to these hopeless little cubs.

Explicit affordances are obvious, perceptual features of an item that clue you in on how it is to be used. With explicit affordances, physical appearance and any accompanying language or text inform the user of how an object is to be used.

Many designers strive to create products that are so easy to navigate, their users can flow through them at first glance. To design something with this level of intuitiveness, it’s imperative designers understand affordances—what they are and how to use them.

However, the reason for these problems isn’t the theory itself, but the way the theory is interpreted - by developers and browsers.

We also include a large number of detailed picture examples, often with 3D renders, that help you understand the context of the rules. For these reason, we generally don't start laying out the final rulebook until production art is complete. Writing and laying out a 20 page rule book like this generally takes about 3 months from start to finish, usually requiring a complete rewrite or two, and involves dozens of editors.

however, if this is relevant to just one spec, you don't necessarily need to include devise helpers to all your controllers specs, you can just explicitly include those helpers in that one controller describe block: require 'spec_helper' describe MyCoolController include Devise::TestHelpers it { } end

Wasn't sure if this belonged as an issue in Devise or Rails though.

This is a great application for using route constraints.

Application: 3-D Shape RegistrationAn important problem in model-based recognition is to find the transformation of a set of datapoints that yields the best match of these points against a shape model. The process is oftenreferred to asdata registration. The data points are typically measured on a real object by rangesensors, touch sensors, etc., and given in Cartesian coordinates. The quality of a match is oftendescribed as the total squared distance from the data pointsto the model. When multiple shapemodels are possible, the one that results in the least total distance is then recognized as the shapeof the object.Quaternions are very effective in solving the above least-squares-based registration problem.

ts geo-metric meaning is also more obvious as the rotation axis and angle can be trivially recovered.

Svelte is there when I need it with useful APIs, but fades into the background as I put my app together.

but I like that Svelte comes with a good CSS story out the box.

Svelte is different in that by default most of your code is only going to run once; a console.log('foo') line in a component will only run when that component is first rendered.

With all this “monetization” happening around Trailblazer, we will also make sure that all free and paid parts of the project grow adult and maintan an LTS - or long-term support - status. Those are good news to all you users out there having been scared to use gems of this project, not knowing whether or not they’re being maintained, breaking code in the future or making your developers addicted to and then cutting off the supply chain. Trailblazer 2.1 onwards is LTS, and the last 1 ½ years of collaboration have proven that.

It means "You're about to talk about words, but words don't matter."

If you want to compile youself you can pass the --with-features=huge to the configure script. Note, however, this does not enable the different language bindings because those are mostly optional and also the various GUIs need to enabled specifically, because you can have only one gui.

When one is searching for it on the internet, there are many many people wondering how one can open .desktop files. It seems trivial, since one usually just has to click an item on the launcher so one thinks there must be some way.

It sounds like a gnome-open (or the equivalent library call) bug. Reassigning.

I agree that it's bad to have to handle this at the application level

Very often in these monorepos, packages are so incredibly specific in functionality, the question then becomes why even have a separate package at all if it’s tightly coupled? Can you use these packages independently or are they tied to specific versions of other packages in the monorepo? It’ll probably be easier to remove the mask and just work as a monolith.

Focus is better than features.

he goes on to say that simple functions should not be packages because they are too small.

Write modules for publication, even if you only use them privately. You will appreciate documentation in the future.

Write modules that do one thing well. Write a new module rather than complicate an old one.

The number one problem that I see developers have when practicing test-first development that impedes them from refactoring their code is that they over-specify behavior in their tests. This leads developers to write more tests than are needed, which can become a burden when refactoring code.

There used to be other backends in addition to C: Java, CSharp, and Javascript but those suffered from bitrot and have been removed.

much software requires continuous changes to meet new requirements and correct bugs, and re-engineering software each time a change is made is rarely practical.

A product’s onceability is, to a certain extent, linked to its usefulness. If it is really useful, we will certainly go to considerable lengths to repair it.

This is a copy of the "AMD" document in the repo, kept here to maintain historical links. If this document differs from the one in the repo, the repo version is the correct one.

Microlibraries are easier to understand, develop and test. They make it easier for new people to get involved and contribute. They reduce the distinction between a “core module” and a “plugin”, and increase the pace of development in D3 features.

Small files are nice, but modularity is also about making D3 more fun.

Unfortunately, given how widely used concat_javascript_sources is, this required changing a lot of tests. It would be nice if we could remove some of the duplication in these tests (so that similar changes would not require updating this many tests), but that can come in another PR.