I no longer mantain this list. There are lots of other very comprehensive JavaScript link lists out there. Please see those, instead (Google "awesome JavaScript" for a start).
| package main | |
| import ( | |
| "fmt" | |
| "io" | |
| "log" | |
| "net/http" | |
| "os" | |
| "time" | |
| ) |
| var gulp = require('gulp'); | |
| var gutil = require('gulp-util'); | |
| var through = require('through2'); | |
| var sourcemaps = require('gulp-sourcemaps'); | |
| var postcss = require('gulp-postcss'); | |
| var filter = require('gulp-filter'); | |
| var concat = require('gulp-concat'); | |
| var modules = require('postcss-modules'); |
(by @andrestaltz)
If you prefer to watch video tutorials with live-coding, then check out this series I recorded with the same contents as in this article: Egghead.io - Introduction to Reactive Programming.
| # Signal catching | |
| def shut_down | |
| puts "\nShutting down gracefully..." | |
| sleep 1 | |
| end | |
| puts "I have PID #{Process.pid}" | |
| # Trap ^C | |
| Signal.trap("INT") { |
| def HashExtensions(hash) | |
| hash.extend(HashExtensions) | |
| end | |
| module HashExtensions | |
| def camelize_keys | |
| dup.camelize_keys! | |
| end |
I was at Amazon for about six and a half years, and now I've been at Google for that long. One thing that struck me immediately about the two companies -- an impression that has been reinforced almost daily -- is that Amazon does everything wrong, and Google does everything right. Sure, it's a sweeping generalization, but a surprisingly accurate one. It's pretty crazy. There are probably a hundred or even two hundred different ways you can compare the two companies, and Google is superior in all but three of them, if I recall correctly. I actually did a spreadsheet at one point but Legal wouldn't let me show it to anyone, even though recruiting loved it.
I mean, just to give you a very brief taste: Amazon's recruiting process is fundamentally flawed by having teams hire for themselves, so their hiring bar is incredibly inconsistent across teams, despite various efforts they've made to level it out. And their operations are a mess; they don't real
Performance is often ignored in Rails development until it becomes a problem. If ignored too long, though, it can get very tricky to improve. It's valuable to regularly audit performance and look for hotspots or design choices that are slowing things down.
Inspecting the log will help identify the source of several performance issues the application may have.
The Rails application log outputs the time spent processing each request. It breakdowns the time spent at the database level as well processing the view code. In development mode, the logs are displayed on STDOUT where the server is being run. In a production setting the logs will be in log/production.log within the application's root directory.