I am looking for the assets for MIT-scratch. Icons inside its interface. I am creating a learn to code curriculum using scratch, and having the assets will be great for me to include into the worksheets.
I have tried googling the assets and screenshotting the interface, but the images are not clear and doing it this way is not efficient.
Scratch is open source so you can access the assets via Github.
I found several in the GUI->src->components folder linked here:
https://github.com/LLK/scratch-gui/tree/develop/src/components
It appears that all icons in interface are svg files.
There are many curriculum's already available for Scratch free on web so you might want to look at others before putting a lot of time into your own.
Related
I'm an old COBOL programmer that has self-taught myself web development over the last decade. I've always used asp.net for developing and when I first started out I had no clue what I was doing. There are some cases I still don't :). That brings me to my question. When I first started out I didn't know what Nuget packages were so if I wanted to use something like bootstrap I would would download the files from the bootstrap website and load them into my project in a Scripts folder. To call the files I added them into the bundling function provided by asp.net. I've since discovered Nuget Manager and keep my bootstrap versions updated through it, but I've always been afraid to remove the reference to these files from the bundling package.
Today I'm trying to upgrade bootstrap from 4.6 to 5.1, but I'm getting an error. If I go into my bundling package and comment out the reference to bootstrap my error goes away. So my question is, if I'm using Nuget to manage my packages, is it safe to remove them from the bundling package? I feel like the answer is "yes it's safe" but was hoping for confirmation and maybe an explanation on how and if Nuget and bundling work together, if at all...
Well, nuget simple in "most" cases downloads some .net .dll's and assemblies, and then often sets a reference for you. (you could do this manual, but hey its a whole lot less work).
but, when you use nuget to install those packages, some might include javaScript libries and code (such as your example).
Because the bundling expects the scripts to be say in this location:
Public Shared Sub RegisterBundles(ByVal bundles As BundleCollection)
bundles.Add(New ScriptBundle("~/bundles/WebFormsJs").Include(
"~/Scripts/WebForms/WebForms.js",
"~/Scripts/WebForms/WebUIValidation.js",
"~/Scripts/WebForms/MenuStandards.js",
etc. etc. etc.c
Then of course, when you nuget a package, then the location of the scripts VERY LIKLEY is not going to be the above location.
So, you would then remove your older scripts (and above script referances), and add in the new location of such scripts.
So, you are free to remove the existing bundling references, but you not then enjoy use of the script manager and system to "merge together" the many script files.
So, you don't have to use bundeling anyway.
However, in most cases, you WANT BOTH the SomeJava.js and SomeJava.min.js files to exist. And if you modify those files, then YOU need to regenerate the .min version. Since you not (likely) to be modifying those .js files, then you can well dump the bundling of such files. But you are free also to add them to the above bundling reference.
All bundling does is "merge" the .js files together - so that you don't have 50 or 100 different separate .js files, and thus 50 or 100 difference downloads and references in a web page to use all those many .js files.
So, it not a huge deal. If you only adding say bootstrap via nuget, then I would hunt down the location of the new .js files, and add them to the bundling. But, it not all that huge of a deal if you don't. The issue then becomes how do you add the new .js and .css files to the given web page you are working on. (and toss in use of a master page, and again more complex).
So, in theory, you could remove the existing (older .js references) and then add the css. files that nuget created. I not looked, and don't know if the .js files remain in "packages" folder, or during an install that nuget copies to some folder (such as scirpts).
Just keep in mind, do keep and have the .min versions of those .js files. if you in web.config set debug=false, then the web site flips over to using the .min versions of the .js files - they have to exist, and even without bundling they have to exist, and this "flip" occurs (you now using .min versions of js files).
This is a HUGE topic, and probably oh so far beyond that of a simple post on SO.
but, suffice to say, you can well dump use of the bundling, and remove your older .js references. (but, since you having to do that, then might as well add the newer references then at that point in time, right???).
In a LabVIEW project, when should I use virtual folder and when should I use auto-populated folder? Why?
You don't have to use either. Your project could just have a main VI and have everything else handled automatically as a dependency.
Personally, I would suggest viewing the project window as a logical organization tool for your work and say that you should only put the things you actually need or want to access from there.
The conclusion from this is that you should generally not use auto-pop folders, as you don't need that. If you want to see the disk hierarchy, you can go to the files tab in the project window.
You can use virtual folders for your logical organization. For example, you might want to have support files for your builds (like an icon for the EXE) and putting those in a folder cleans up the project. Another example might be that you have a library (like a class) and you want to group subitems in that library into some logical groups. You can create virtual folders inside that library.
The one place where I do use auto-pop. folders is if I have some dynamically loaded VIs or another list of files which are placed in the same folder. Adding that folder to the project as auto-pop allows it to be handled cleanly.
It is your choice. How do you want to manage your files?
For myself, the answer is “never ever use auto-populating folders.” Those folders do not play well with libraries or classes (by design, not because of a bug), and they make it hard to remove items from a project but keep the files around (because deleting from the folder is automatically deleting from disk). There are plenty of others who agree with me. But they are nice for simple apps that don’t use any modern software design tools.
Webdev beginner here. I have been working on a website for a couple of weeks, and I want to start using the Bulma CSS framework and sass now.
I cloned Bulma https://github.com/jgthms/bulma into my project folder, and I see that Bulma has it's own css and sass folders.
Am I supposed to:
-put all my css, php, html, js into the Bulma folder and have it essentially become my new project folder?
-or should I just access Bulma's files through the Bulma folder, in my project folder.
I could not find any straight forward information online about how Bulma files/folders integrate into existing projects.
Here is my project folder currently:
I don't really know the best way to organize web projects, especially now adding frameworks. I can see the potential of things getting hairy, and I want to make sure I won't be slowly building a sloppy project pile that's gonna screw me over in the future, or moving folders and messing up relative addressing etc.
Thank you for your time,
Best
-Joe
Between the two choices you mention, the second is the appropriate one.
Best Practice to Organize Javascript Library & CSS Folder Structure
Web project's folders/directories structure - Best practices
There are many ways people structure their project folders. Google something like "website folder structure" and read resources like the above links to get a general idea. The two common ones are grouping files by type and by module/library. The second way is what I would recommend and is what your second choice does.
If you just need default Bulma, all you need to do is load bulma.min.css in your web pages from wherever you've chosen to put it. So out of the entire package, that file is really the only necessary one to keep if you like (and perhaps the LICENSE file since it requests that you do).
If you are customising Bulma, you will need to create your own sass file that should live outside the bulma folder, and then follow the customize Bulma documentation. It would be very similar to an answer I wrote for a Bootstrap question.
I am finding old CSS code on my browser instead it has the new code in server files. I can see the minified CSS code on browser when application gets loaded up.
My team is using Liferay framework which seems to minify the CSS files. I am noob in liferay.
I found portal-ext.properties under liferay-portal-6.1.10-ee-ga1/tomcat-7.0.25/webapps/ROOT/WEB-INF/classes/ but didn't found any parameter for minifying the CSS files?
You shouldn't just update any CSS code you find deployed on the server. Instead, update your theme, build it (it builds to a web application) and deploy it to the server. This will take care of minification and updating caches. Just changing random files in the realm of the webserver will not.
For this you'll have to find the source files for your theme (or a whole plugins-sdk, which might contain that theme). Look at your organization's source control system, which is where I'd expect it.
Explaining how to update and build themes goes well beyond the scope of a single answer here, if these are really your first steps it might be worth getting some help from someone who has some experience with Liferay.
We have a lot of websites with common functionality developed by 3 persons, in the business logic we use a common library project (in a shared directory) so we all use the same functions. This way the corrections and improvements are shared for the following projects or when we recompile an existing project. We have a class for some UI common functions too (loading a ListControl with x data and so)
The problem is with some web parts like CSS, Javascripts, Common Pages (login, configuration, customer management), those we don't know exactly how we can centralize them so we have those parts in the shared project so we don't have to copy paste corrections/improvements manually to the other websites each time...
Example of current website structure:
-MyWebSite1
-Styles.css
-Scripts.js
-Login.aspx
-Funx.cs (Functions specific to this site)
-Consx.cs (Session and other variables specific to this site)
-CommonProject (In a network shared directory)
-FunBusiness.cs
-FunWebUI.cs
-ConsBusiness.cs
-ConsWEB.cs
Is there a way of doing this?
For now the closest we have come to solving this problem is following this article for the Javascript part:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb398930(v=vs.100).aspx
We are now investigating using only one reference to a js file and including the other javascript references dinamically and the common CSS and MasterPages parts...
Maybe you can add those common references files as Linked File in Visual Studio. In this way you can maintain one file, while kept in a different location.
From Microsoft:
Link file leaves the file in its current location and maintains a link to the file from your current project.
Another solution would be to create a copy script before compile in Visual Studio. Reference over here.