Mat Schaffer - Latest Comments

Re: Hello, Jekyll.

schapht — Sat, 14 Nov 2009 12:52:54 -0000

whoops! thanks Aaron. Guess you can tell where I originally copied that from :) Fixed.

Re: Hello, Jekyll.

Aaron — Sat, 14 Nov 2009 00:21:14 -0000

looks great; I thought you might like a bug report :-) The link elements in your atom feed point to the wrong place:
<link href="http://80kv.com/tech/2009/11/hello-jekyll" />

Re: Hello, Jekyll.

schapht — Fri, 13 Nov 2009 09:13:34 -0000

Thanks man! I might tweak the style on this comment section a bit now that I actually have comments, but I'm pretty happy with it.

Now for some content!

Re: Hello, Jekyll.

twitter-4417291 — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 20:47:47 -0000

Love it!!! might actually steal some of your design elements for my own homepage redesign (tho' wont do it in Jekyll yet ;) )

Re: Installing ImageMagick on OS X Leopard

Monica — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 19:39:02 -0000

Thanks a lot. This worked for me with no problems on 10.5.8.

Re: Call JRuby, Jython or other JVM scripting language from Maven

Anshu Mishra — Sat, 24 Oct 2009 09:23:09 -0000

Nice Tips.
Thanks !

Re: Installing ImageMagick on OS X Leopard

infografik — Thu, 15 Oct 2009 19:54:14 -0000

I get this errow after entering line 5:
./configure --enable-shared --prefix=/usr/local

configure: error: no acceptable C compiler found in $PATH
See `config.log' for more details.

Re: JavaScript templates, build-time lovin’

Yves (BeeBole) — Thu, 08 Oct 2009 13:32:24 -0000

Thanks both for your comments. The only answer I can give is that it is difficult to seduce everyone ;)

But feedback is always good :)

Re: JavaScript templates, build-time lovin’

couchoud — Mon, 05 Oct 2009 09:18:44 -0000

Mat pretty much sums it up for me. Using span tags was the deal breaker. I'm fine with using span tags to define content, but feared the id/class name duplication that might come along with PURE. It's too easy for someone to reuse a template variable that might be used as a selector somewhere down the line. Also, I personally don't like seeing a bunch of span tags wrapping content. It just looks a little ugly to me.

Re: JavaScript templates, build-time lovin’

schapht — Sun, 04 Oct 2009 14:32:14 -0000

I'll see if I can get some of my coworkers to comment as well, but the decision largely came down to the use of spans and classes for interpolation and iteration.

We're pretty comfortable with spans and classes designating style. The general consensus seemed to be that giving them a second purpose (content) was a poor fit. We use a lot of Freemarker so Trimpath's use of ${} was a more comfortable progression. Of course I'm sure you could apply this concept to PURE just as easily, so feel free to fork if it if you find it useful.

Re: JavaScript templates, build-time lovin’

Yves (BeeBole) — Sun, 04 Oct 2009 02:33:19 -0000

Hey, I would be very interested in knowing what made you go for Trimpath instead of PURE.

Re: Harsh opinions on JavaScript testing

TJ Holowaychuk — Sun, 20 Sep 2009 23:55:32 -0000

For sure man, I see the value in that, it is a perfectly valid argument. Which is why I support literal JS specs as well (you can even use a combination of each if you want), but yeah a bigger team would not benefit much from the grammar. I work solo so thats where my rage with JS literals got me started with the grammar lol

Re: Harsh opinions on JavaScript testing

schapht — Sun, 20 Sep 2009 23:49:15 -0000

Thanks for the support! I see the cool factor but "getting the hang of it" would become a speed-bump when trying to introduce the tool to the rest of my team (~40 devs total). And the specs won't be worth much if I'm the only one using them. I'll hit you up in IRC once I get started for sure.

Re: Harsh opinions on JavaScript testing

TJ Holowaychuk — Sun, 20 Sep 2009 23:38:46 -0000

hell even if you do not like snake-case 2.x partially implements interchangeable DSLs (3.x will top this off) so you can have camel-case galore. The grammar can be summed up really quickly, this slideshow might be worth checking out, speeds up testing once you get the hang of it :) http://slidechop.com/presentations/68/slides

Re: Harsh opinions on JavaScript testing

TJ Holowaychuk — Sun, 20 Sep 2009 23:31:12 -0000

Sounds good! not much is forced upon the user though. Check out the readme / site or drop by the #jspec IRC channel if you need any help. People seem to jump to conclusions about how things have to be done with JSpec, which are never true, its very extensible / customizable.

The project templates for example are simply a starting point, the structure does not have to be that way at all. 3.x is going to ship with a bunch of new features, hopefully timed together with my Ruby TestSwarm implementation.

Besides if you find there is something missing, or blocking your way drop an issue on Github and I will check it out :)

Re: Harsh opinions on JavaScript testing

schapht — Sun, 20 Sep 2009 23:21:32 -0000

Thanks for chiming in TJ! I think JSpec will be the next tool I look at for testing. The features definitely look good, I just worry that a number of your opinions won't mesh with the projects I need to test. We'll see how flexible it is once I start digging in.

Re: Harsh opinions on JavaScript testing

TJ Holowaychuk — Sat, 19 Sep 2009 01:34:31 -0000

JSpec can be used without the grammar. The syntax is very similar to Screw.Unit, however JSpec has far more features, and is actively developed / tested by the community.

Re: Installing ImageMagick on OS X Leopard

fahri — Fri, 28 Aug 2009 07:24:17 -0000

Thanks Mat

Re: Harsh opinions on JavaScript testing

schapht — Thu, 27 Aug 2009 09:21:33 -0000

Right on. Thanks for the check. I too often forget to revisit the YUI suite since I initially used it in 2005 when it only had a small handful of tools. Maybe I'll do another post with that and a deeper dive into JSpec.

Re: Harsh opinions on JavaScript testing

TTop — Wed, 26 Aug 2009 14:02:09 -0000

I've used YUI Test a bit, seems decent: http://developer.yahoo.com/yui/yuitest, but I haven't worked with any of these others, so I can't compare.

Re: Installing ImageMagick on OS X Leopard

Amed Rodriguez — Tue, 25 Aug 2009 23:56:12 -0000

that's useful! but actually you must change the url of the first line:

curl http://www.ijg.org/files/jpegsrc.v7.tar.gz > jpegsrc.v7.tar.gz

Re: Installing ImageMagick on OS X Leopard

Johnnie Wilcox — Fri, 07 Aug 2009 12:26:57 -0000

Thank you a thousand times. So many ways to install ImageMagick on OS X and this is the only one that worked for me.

Re: iSepta Train View, my time with Dashcode

jones78999 — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 10:51:44 -0000

iSepta is great. I don't know what else to say

Re: Installing ImageMagick on OS X Leopard

pete — Sun, 07 Jun 2009 10:26:27 -0000

Thanks Matt
Saved the day for me (again - I found this site before for something I think) - especially with that bloody backticked glibtool trick!!!!!!

Re: Removing code is a feature

Michael Bevilacqua-Linn — Thu, 09 Apr 2009 22:10:08 -0000

Amen. One of the most productive things I've done at work in the past few months was deleting ~10k of code/configuration.