- Jan 2023
How effective is second language incidental vocabulary learning? A meta-analysis
- Jan 2022
Nast, C. (2022, January 15). Do the Omicron Numbers Mean What We Think They Mean? The New Yorker. https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2022/01/24/do-the-omicron-numbers-mean-what-we-think-they-mean
- paediatric hospitalization
- data interpretation
- causal inference
- viral damage
- incidental covid
- social distancing
- Feb 2021
Grouped inputs It can be convenient to apply the same options to a bunch of inputs. One common use case is making many inputs optional. Instead of setting default: nil on each one of them, you can use with_options to reduce duplication.
This is just a general Ruby/Rails tip, nothing specific to active_interaction (except that it demonstrates that it may be useful sometimes, and gives a specific example of when you might use it).
Still, in my opinion, this doesn't belong in the docs. Partly because I think repeating the
default: nilfor every item is an acceptable type of duplication, which would be better, clearer (because it's more explicit), simpler, keeps those details closer to the place where they are relevant (imagine if there were 50 fields within a
I also think think that it creates a very arbitrary logical "grouping" within your code, which may cause you to unintentionally override/trump / miss the chance to use a different, more logical/natural/important/useful logical grouping instead. For example, it might be more natural/important/useful to group the fields by the section/fieldset/model that they belong with, even if your only
groupingis a comment:
# User fields string :name integer :age date :birthday, default: nil # Food preferences array :pizza_toppings boolean :wants_cake, default: nil
may be a more useful grouping/organization than:
# Fields that are required string :name integer :age array :pizza_toppings # Fields that are optional with_options default: nil do date :birthday boolean :wants_cake end
Or it might be better to list them strictly in the same order as they appear in your model that you are trying to match. Why? Because then you (or your code reviewer) can more easily compare the lists between the two places to make sure you haven't missed any fields from the model, and quickly be able to identify which ones are missing (hopefully intentionally missing).
In other words, their "optionalness" seems to me like a pretty incidental property, not a key property worthy of allowing to dictate the organization/order/grouping of your code.
‘Programs are meant to be read by humans and only incidentally for computers to execute.’
- Oct 2020
Typically, platform accessibility APIs do not provide a vehicle to notify assistive technologies of a role value change, and consequently, assistive technologies may not update their cache with the new role attribute value.
It's too bad they couldn't just allow role to be changed, and assistive technologies would just have to be updated to follow the suit.
The limits are chosen to avoid wrapping in editors with the window width set to 80, even if the tool places a marker glyph in the final column when wrapping lines.