The HTTP TTY(htty.github.io) |
The HTTP TTY(htty.github.io) |
The website lags on my laptop. Scrolling lags. Why does scrolling lag? How?
What's going on with the internet these days...
The "stylesheets/styles.css" file contains the following rule at the beginning:
body {
...
background: url('data:image/png;base64,...') fixed;
}
.wrapper::before {
content: ' ';
position: fixed;
height: 100%;
width: 100%;
top: 0;
left: 0;
background: url('data:image/png;base64,...');
will-change: transform;
}
Could be a browser bug on your system? (I see no lag of any kind)
http://htty.github.io/htty/javascripts/scale.fix.js
which appears to add a 'gesturestart' event, and a weird conditional comment at the bottom that shouldn't appear for non-IE, but whose condition is to explicitly run the function defined in that script in non-IE browsers...
Any non-ruby alternatives with similar features?
Can I pre-setup a environment? To debug my service I need to go always to some address, set a referer header, disable SSL and set a cookie before starting. I would be awesome to save a state e continue from it everytime.
"HTTY" appears to be written in fraktur. "The HTTP TTY" appears to be written in "grafitti"
The standard figlet fonts are here: http://www.figlet.org/examples.html
Here's the entry on fraktur from the figlet fonts library: http://www.jave.de/figlet/fonts/details/fraktur.html
You aren't asking for a font that produces ASCII art are you? If so then you might misunderstand how ASCII art is produced.
Sometimes installing an entire programming language just to use one tool is not worth the time I could possibly waste just trying to figure out how to get it working (assuming it works). Instead looking for alternatives built around tech that's already available in my system makes more sense to me, because of a higher chance of familiarity and the benefit of less time possibly wasted.
There's also the curiosity of wanting to see the project implemented in a language you're familiar with.
Say I want to run two programs an a server, both written in Ruby. Those programs depend on a bunch of libraries. Ok, so I go on and just install those libraries. WRONG. The programs need specific versions of those libraries (both of which differ from the one coming with my Linux distro) and there's no single library version that works with both of them. To make things worse, one program needs a different version of the Ruby interpreter than the other. Only one of those is included in the Linux distribution I'm running.
So instead of being able to (at least partially) rely on the maintenance done by my Linux distro, I'd have to maintain my own Ruby interpreters and libraries. Yeah, right.
For that reason I consider running Ruby programs a liability. Sure, you have to deal with stuff like that everywhere but I never encountered an ecosystem where things are that bad and things break with any other update. I've heard the Javascript/Node people do an equally crappy job but I'm not going to find out personally.
So while I saw a couple of quite nice things written in Ruby, we're not going to use them if their maintenance is such a pain.
The ones I've tried have been dependant on a specific version of ruby. So you have to work through that. I'm not a resident of the ruby ecosystem, and I don't want to figure out the "why didn't you just" method of managing that. As the saying goes, it's hard to remember your objective was to drain the swamp when you're up to your ass in alligators.
IIRC, vagrant just includes the version of ruby it depends on. Or maybe it just includes a ruby in case you don't have one. I like and use vagrant.
It's not a Mac thing like other commenters suspect---I'm on Linux, using Firefox.
Just fyi, but go doesn't have packages (in this context). Just native binaries with no dependencies.
Edit: in fact https://golang.org/doc/code.html refers to this as "Remote packages".
That's why I would love to see more Docker containers and docker-compose.yaml files for tools shared on HN. A Docker container for this would be super simple to build using an official Ruby Docker container and it would save so much time for anyone who wants to try the tool.
- You're running Linux (or have access to a Linux box)
- The box running Linux is x86_64
- You have a modern kernel set up
- The box has a bunch of ram
- The box has a bunch of disk space (for installing Docker)
Docker forces you to have modern Intel-based hardware. Which excludes people with stuff like the Novena[1] or an old Thinkpad (because 32bits).
I'll be honest I've not been keeping up with Docker. It shows, right?
docker exec -it $NAME /bin/bash
docker run --rm -it $NAME /bin/bash
Docker is useful for trying out cli interpreters like this, iojs, or any thing else of the sort. I wouldn't want to use docker if I planned on keeping it around to use more than a couple of times though.
In the case of `go get`, there is no preconfigured package, it's akin to a pull and make. Because of that, `go get` tends to be targeted at Go developers. Unlike Python/Ruby/etc, typically only Go developers have the Go compiler at hand.
I mean, i'm in a similar camp with the OP (that you replied to), i don't like installing a runtime just for a specific package. But i typically look at projects that use Ruby as targeted for Ruby developers - not me.
Go is slightly different though, because the compiler is mainly for developers. You don't have to know what Go is to run a "Go binary". So, it's worth an asterisk. That's all i meant :)
But yeah, there's a bunch of Go programmers (presumably those coming from Python or Ruby) that don't really seem to get that you don't need to put source code and a compiler onto your production servers.