Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 7 years ago.
Improve this question
I have been using prepros for a while. It's a easy to use precompiler that pretty much does everything I need. I heard it is not good for team work but didn't know why.
Why would you spend time to set up gulp to for minification, concatenation, uglify/mangle, live reload and live server when you can simply press one button and do all of these works in 5 secs?
I've never used Prepros and therefore have nothing negative to say about it. However, I think:
a) Your point is somewhat reductionist. Gulp isn't just a precompiler, it's a task runner and can likely do a lot more than what Prepros is able to do out of the box. It's great if Prepros fits your needs, but what happens when you run into something that it can't do?
b) Gulp/Grunt/etc. are free (limiting proprietary software purchases is often beneficial in a team setting) and open source (easily tailorable to your needs)
As an aside, I'm not sure if Prepros allows settings to be shared by different members of the development team, but will gulp/grunt/etc. you check your gulpfile/gruntfile/etc. into source control and build tasks/etc. are available to all developers with access to said repository/project
Related
Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 1 year ago.
Improve this question
I recently created a Vue.js project. I've added a few packages, including Firebase (I have the modular v9 package, so it has tree shaking enabled), and Rive. When building my application, I see that my final bundle is about 800-900KiB, while webpack suggests keeping it under 240. I created a report and I saw that Rive and Firebase were the main culprits of the big filesize (together they were about 750KiB). Rive is a package still in early development so it wouldn't surprise me if it wasn't optimized for production, but the fact that firebase also used so much space (specially considering I used v9) made me wonder whether I did something wrong?
Anyway, my question is, is having a bundle of around 1MiB bad? How badly would it impact user?
1MB isn't bad, it may take slightly longer to load initially, considering most jpg images you see online can be up to 1MB each easily. most users with modern bandwidth connections will not notice any negative side effects.
It's just something you should keep in mind.
Closed. This question needs to be more focused. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it focuses on one problem only by editing this post.
Closed 2 years ago.
Improve this question
(Edited to narrow the question to Ada. Have posted other questions for Fortran and COBOL.)
I've spent some time in the past year dealing with changes to my code due to Python v2->v3 and R v3->v4 changes. It got me curious as to some of the older languages that are still in use.
I know Ada still sees occasional updates and functionality upgrades. I would assume that their mission-critical nature makes those changes smaller and more backward-compatible, but I don't really know and couldn't find it with a web search.
What and when were the last changes to Ada that was on the same rough order as the Python 2->3 changes?
Ada pays a lot of attention to reverse compatibility, to avoid breaking existing code, when making changes.
Last formal Ada release was Ada-2012, there is another one (Ada-202X) in progress.
Ada-2012 has a lot that Ada-83 doesn't, but I'd be surprised if there was anything more than trivial work to build an Ada-83 project (or Ada-95 or Ada-2005) in Ada-2012.
There are some differences though : from Ada-83 to Ada-2012 As you can see, there's really not much to say for 30 years of development.
Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 6 years ago.
Improve this question
I have looked around and have not found many opinions on if it is important to update your R software as soon as a new version is released.
Any opinions would be welcomed!
As with any software, you should carefully evaluate what is included in any new release. If the release consists only of bug-fixes, it is usually expedient to install it as soon as it is practicable for you to do so. If the scope of the release is more expansive -- new features, etc. -- you should review the release more carefully.
If you're in the middle of an important project with a killer deadline, it's quite reasonable to wait a little while before applying any update.
Also, you should as a matter of routine re-run a selection of jobs, that you know the answers to, in order to be sure that the answers are still the same. "No, mistakes of this nature don't happen often, but they do happen."
Closed. This question needs to be more focused. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it focuses on one problem only by editing this post.
Closed 8 years ago.
Improve this question
I'm writing relatively small, but not simple networking library which is going to be used at least from C,java,python,ruby and C#. Is there a way to make go bindings to the other languages the way in can be done form C? If not is there other way?
Right now, you can't write libraries in Go that can be used in other languages. Go has a runtime environment that does a lot of things (like sheduling go-routines, collecting garbage) for you. This runtime environment is written under the assumption that it controls the whole program. This assumption does not hold if Go code would be used from inside another language, as the Go library cannot influence the binary that uses it.
I imagine that a JSON service would do what you describe.
Have a look at the json test for a simple example
It wouldnt matter what languages you used to set and get data from your app
Closed. This question is off-topic. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it's on-topic for Stack Overflow.
Closed 10 years ago.
Improve this question
I have some software which we added an open common file format (.iwb) to. The government organisation that initiated that work has been cut in the cutbacks.
Now a not for profit organisation has taken up the mantle, however its going to cost and once you pay you are not allowed to reveal the "materials" you gain.
http://www.imsglobal.org/iwbcff/jointheIWBCFFIalliance.cfm
I understand people need to be paid but the whole not sharing thing makes it feel like its going against what a standard is meant for.
What's a good strategy:
Pay up and shut up (there might be plenty of closed standards
that work in this way)
Fork the standard to an organisation that will not require people to pay to read it
Drop the file format
Stay behind the curve and reverse engineer the files
Any standard that is not freely accessible is no standard at all but is instead a proprietary format. I'd say either:
petition them to open the standard up
Drop your support for it (and tell your customers why you have to)
Fork an earlier open version and create a free version of the standard
Paying for access to a standard sounds like a horrible idea because:
It encourages this behavior
It's likely to just be wasted money because others won't want to pay either, and a standard used by no one is not a standard.
Publish the last version you had access to.
Site that you support that version of the standard.