(also know as lies and/or alternative facts)
As a developer, it bothers me when someone sends me a large pdf file compared to the number of pages. Recently, I recieved a 12MB scanned document for just one letter-sized page... so I got to googlin, like I usually do, and found ghostscript!
to learn more abot ghostscript (gs): https://www.ghostscript.com/
What we are interested in, is the gs command line tool, which provides many options for manipulating PDF, but we are interested in compressign those large PDF's into small yet legible documents.
credit goes to this answer on askubuntu forum: https://askubuntu.com/questions/3382/reduce-filesize-of-a-scanned-pdf/3387#3387?newreg=bceddef8bc334e5b88bbfd17a6e7c4f9
| function slugify(string) { | |
| const a = 'àáâäæãåāăąçćčđďèéêëēėęěğǵḧîïíīįìıİłḿñńǹňôöòóœøōõőṕŕřßśšşșťțûüùúūǘůűųẃẍÿýžźż·/_,:;' | |
| const b = 'aaaaaaaaaacccddeeeeeeeegghiiiiiiiilmnnnnoooooooooprrsssssttuuuuuuuuuwxyyzzz------' | |
| const p = new RegExp(a.split('').join('|'), 'g') | |
| return string.toString().toLowerCase() | |
| .replace(/\s+/g, '-') // Replace spaces with - | |
| .replace(p, c => b.charAt(a.indexOf(c))) // Replace special characters | |
| .replace(/&/g, '-and-') // Replace & with 'and' | |
| .replace(/[^\w\-]+/g, '') // Remove all non-word characters |
This content moved here: https://exploringjs.com/impatient-js/ch_arrays.html#quickref-arrays
https://twitter.com/snookca/status/1073299331262889984?s=21
Happy to chat about this. There’s an obvious disclaimer that there’s a cost to css-in-js solutions, but that cost is paid specifically for the benefits it brings; as such it’s useful for some usecases, and not meant as a replacement for all workflows.
(These conversations always get heated on twitter, so please believe that I’m here to converse, not to convince. In return, I promise to listen to you too and change my opinions; I’ve had mad respect for you for years and would consider your feedback a gift. Also, some of the stuff I’m writing might seem obvious to you; I’m not trying to tell you if all people of some of the details, but it might be useful to someone else who bumps into this who doesn’t have context)
So the big deal about css-in-js (cij) is selectors.
TLDR: JWTs should not be used for keeping your user logged in. They are not designed for this purpose, they are not secure, and there is a much better tool which is designed for it: regular cookie sessions.
If you've got a bit of time to watch a presentation on it, I highly recommend this talk: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pYeekwv3vC4 (Note that other topics are largely skimmed over, such as CSRF protection. You should learn about other topics from other sources. Also note that "valid" usecases for JWTs at the end of the video can also be easily handled by other, better, and more secure tools. Specifically, PASETO.)
A related topic: Don't use localStorage (or sessionStorage) for authentication credentials, including JWT tokens: https://www.rdegges.com/2018/please-stop-using-local-storage/
The reason to avoid JWTs comes down to a couple different points:
If you use server rendering, keep in mind that neither useLayoutEffect nor useEffect can run until the JavaScript is downloaded.
You might see a warning if you try to useLayoutEffect on the server. Here's two common ways to fix it.
If this effect isn't important for first render (i.e. if the UI still looks valid before it runs), then useEffect instead.
function MyComponent() {
%GetOptimizationStatus return a set of bitwise flags instead of a single value,
to access the value, you need to take the binary representation of the returned value.
Now, for example, if 65 is returned, the binary representation is the following:
(65).toString(2).padStart(12, '0');
// 000001000001Each binary digit acts as a boolean with the following meaning:
