22 Matching Annotations
- Last 7 days
-
trailblazer.to trailblazer.to
-
patch: -> { step Destroy.method(:tidy_storage), before: :delete_model }
-
- Feb 2021
-
trailblazer.to trailblazer.to
-
Patching has no implicit, magical side-effects and is strongly encouraged to customize flows for a specific case in a quick and consise way.
-
-
dry-rb.org dry-rb.org
-
Another solution is using the Safe Navigation Operator &. introduced in Ruby 2.3 which is a bit better because this is a language feature rather than an opinionated runtime environment pollution
-
-
github.com github.com
-
I don't see a way to hook into Devise's route mapping load process to add the action (several monkey patching attempts failed)
-
-
stackoverflow.com stackoverflow.com
-
According to this comment you might want to override the structurally_incompatible_values_for_or to overcome the issue: def structurally_incompatible_values_for_or(other) Relation::SINGLE_VALUE_METHODS.reject { |m| send("#{m}_value") == other.send("#{m}_value") } + (Relation::MULTI_VALUE_METHODS - [:eager_load, :references, :extending]).reject { |m| send("#{m}_values") == other.send("#{m}_values") } + (Relation::CLAUSE_METHODS - [:having, :where]).reject { |m| send("#{m}_clause") == other.send("#{m}_clause") } end
-
- Dec 2020
-
www.npmjs.com www.npmjs.com
-
You can afford to make a proper PR to upstream.
-
The change would be useful to other people as-is.
-
The change is too consequential to be developed in situ.
-
Patches can be reviewed as part of your normal review process, forks probably can't
-
Get told in big red letters when the dependency changed and you need to check that your fix is still valid.
-
Keep your patches colocated with the code that depends on them.
-
Sometimes forks need extra build steps, e.g. with react-native for Android. Forget that noise.
Tags
- patching vs. forking
- advantages/merits/pros
- forking (patching vs. forking)
- when to _
- code organization: co-location
- doing it right/properly
- taking the time to do it right/properly
- review process
- proper
- limited time: not right now (maybe later)
- errors/warnings are helpful for development
- too hard/complicated/non-trivial
- helpful
- pull request
- patching (patching vs. forking)
Annotators
URL
-
- Oct 2020
-
ponyfoo.com ponyfoo.comPony Foo1
-
There are other features you *could* actually polyfill, such as Array.of, Number.isNaN or Object.assign, because those don’t introduce syntax changes to the language – except that you shouldn’t.
-
-
humanwhocodes.com humanwhocodes.com
-
github.com github.com
-
Polyfills are naughty as they patch native APIs, while ponyfills are pure and don't affect the environment.
-
How are ponyfills better than polyfills? A polyfill is code that adds missing functionality by monkey patching an API. Unfortunately, it usually globally patches built-ins, which affects all code running in the environment. This is especially problematic when a polyfill is not fully spec compliant (which in some cases is impossible), as it could cause very hard to debug bugs and inconsistencies. Or when the spec for a new feature changes and your code depends on behavior that a module somewhere else in the dependency tree polyfills differently. In general, you should not modify API's you don't own.
-
- Sep 2020
-
github.com github.com
-
Want to use this now? Existing projects A more robust and maintainable way to incorporate this patch into your workflow using patch-package:
-
- Jul 2020
-
github.com github.com
-
But I'll definitely take underscore mixins over extending String.prototype or other clunky implementations any day.
-
- Mar 2020
-
www.sitepoint.com www.sitepoint.com
-
Instead of re-opening Ruby classes like that (I get involuntary twitches), for our little exercise we are going to invent another name
IMHO, re-opening classes is okay. Certainly better than duplicating an entire core Ruby class and giving it a silly, less-meaningful name. (Though I'm not sure he actually intended people to use Lax instead of Lazy. I think he was just showing how easy it is to implement Lazy from scratch in Ruby.)
-
-
stackoverflow.com stackoverflow.com
- Oct 2019
- Jan 2019
-
www.bitwig.com www.bitwig.com
-
allowing common connections to be made wirelessly
This sounds a bit like “send” and “receive” in some (visual) programming languages and modular synths. But the fact that it’s based on common connections sounds quite clever.
-