35 Matching Annotations
  1. Last 7 days
    1. Been seeing this comment copy/pasted everywhere it's pathetic what people will do for thumbs up/awards on reviews, be original and make your own review. If you guys need proof go and look at NVL reviews, I saw it on another game a few weeks ago too.

      annoying

  2. Apr 2021
    1. Neither question nor answer appears to understand the notion of semantic HTML. Height and width are presentational attributes regardless of where you put them. For semantics we establish what the image means to content in the alt tag. I don't remember why it was so important to width/height in the HTML but I suspect it was in case you hit browsers without CSS rendering. It's not a semantics issue. If anything it thwarts separation of concerns to a degree.

      claim: that the OP's question and this answer are incorrect

      Could we say that this answer (that this comment replies to) missed the point?

      I actually believed and thought this answer was spot on ... until I read this comment, and then I reversed my opinion.

    2. If anything it thwarts separation of concerns to a degree.
    1. It has two very different meanings, that you would have to distinguish by context. One meaning is just expressing that we have limitations. If you don't know something, that's just tough, you don't know it and you have to live with that. You don't have information if you don't have that information. The other meaning is that not only are there gaps in our knowledge, but often we don't even know what the gaps in our knowledge are. I don't know how to speak Finnish. That's a gap in my knowledge that I know about. I know that I don't know how to speak Finnish. But there are gaps in my knowledge that I'm not even aware of. That's where you can say "You don't know what you don't know" meaning that you don't even know what knowledge you are missing.

      I had this thought too.

    1. “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!).
    2. I wish to define methods within the class they belong to. Using class << self demonstrates that approach clearly — we are defining methods within the actual singleton class scope.
    3. When we usedef self.method, though, we are defining a method across scopes: we are present in the regular class scope, but we use Ruby’s ability to define methods upon specific instances from anywhere; self within a class definition is the Class instance we are working on (i.e. the class itself). Therefore, usingdef self.method is a leap to another scope, and this feels wrong to me.
    1. I strongly prefer this over Carcassonne. It plays faster (I don't want a tile laying game to go for more than 30 mins or so) and I happen to like the limited options. Carcassonne just gets on my nerves because I just don't view selecting between so many placement options to be that interesting. Obviously, YMMV. Ditto the previous statement, it's different than Carcassonne. And that's why I like it.
    2. I recently played a prototype of an upcoming game called Bronze. This takes the tile-laying/ territory claiming mechanic and builds on it by adding abilities to each of the tiles. they benefit you in some way if you claim them. The result is a very similar feel to Fjords (competing for a share of the map) but with greater depth.
    1. It is one of the better games to stuff in (y)our luggage when on holidays. (We tried Hive a couple of times, but that is too heavy stuff for the holidays.)
    1. What I dislike from the achievements is the "Dialogue Skipper". I really don't like it because you are encouraging people just to skim or even skip it at all and not get interested with the story. I earned this achievement on a 2nd run but I had a friend who just skipped it all on her 1st try.What devs should encourage is for the gamers to have a lot of playing time on their game so they would recommend it to others and not just do it for the cards and uninstalling it afterwards.
    1. Most of the projects here are the kind that might be fun to make but shortly end up in the trash (like: animals made out of toilet paper tubes, a Paper plate ring toss game, A necklace made of colored plastic straws...)
    1. In my opinion, the W3C definition is unnecessarily confusing and restrictive. The dictionary definition of aside is "a temporary departure from a main theme or topic", and the spec should just stick to that, rather than introducing subtle distinctions.
    1. Fortunately for fans of high quality puzzle games, RUSH is anything but simple.

      I agree. A good puzzle should not be too simple.

    1. why do you guys think have_css matcher is named the way it is? I mean, it sure deals with css identifiers, but have_css gives(at least to me) the impression that the page has certain stylesheet loading.
  3. Mar 2021
    1. I like this approach more because I can scan the code that renders the Box component and easily spot that it takes two children. If the Box took any props, they'd be within the opening <Box> tag, and they would be distinct from any children props.
    2. One gripe I've had with this approach is that you lose the visual cues that you're passing children into the Box component; they now aren't nested within the Box when you render them like we're used to in HTML; it's now up to you to read the props and spot which ones are being used to provide children.
    1. this is so stupid (that there is no sensible way to run a Desktop file from the terminal)
    2. If I do gnome-open foo.desktop it simply opens foo.desktop as a text file. If I make it executable and then run it in bash it simply fails (which is expected, it's clearly not bash script). EDIT: Doing exec /fullpath/foo.desktop gives me a Permission denied message, even if I change ownership to myself. If I make executable and do the same command, the terminal tab I'm using simply closes (I'm guessing it crashes). Finally, if I do sudo exec /fullpath/foo.desktop, I get an error reporting sudo: exec: command not found.
  4. Feb 2021
    1. Another thing I don’t like is the name of the config file manifest.js. Internally Sprockets has the concept of a manifest already Sprockets::Manifest, but the two aren’t directly coupled. We also already have a “manifest” JSON file that gets generated in public/assets/ and has manifest in the name .Sprockets-manifest-140998229eec5a9a5802b31d0ef6ed25.json. I know one is a JS file and one is a JSON file, but it’s a bit confusing to talk about.

      When I first heard of app/assets/config/manifest.js, I was a bit confused too, and assumed/wondered if it was related to the manifest it generates under public.

    2. The link name is not very helpful, it doesn’t explain what it does very well.
    1. @adisos if reform-rails will not match, I suggest to use: https://github.com/orgsync/active_interaction I've switched to it after reform-rails as it was not fully detached from the activerecord, code is a bit hacky and complex to modify, and in overall reform not so flexible as active_interaction. It has multiple params as well: https://github.com/orgsync/active_interaction/blob/master/spec/active_interaction/modules/input_processor_spec.rb#L41

      I'm not sure what he meant by:

      fully detached from the activerecord I didn't think it was tied to ActiveRecord.

      But I definitely agree with:

      code is a bit hacky and complex to modify

    1. If you compare the code of Reform and the code of ActiveForm-Rails, I think the last is more simple and clear for a behavior similar (or better).
  5. Sep 2020
    1. While there is some precedence in other frameworks for using as, the word doesn't fit well. Since you are adding functionality to elements I like the word add better (and it only has 1 more character).