mradmin

You'll also get major specificity issues when using element selectors with other class/id type selectors. My rule of thumb is classes and only classes for styling, it really makes life a lot easier. (Even if you have a unique element on the page, don't use the ID in your selector to style it.)

    <section class="body">
        <main class="content"></main>
        <aside class="sidebar"></aside>
    </section>

I have no idea what's going on. First time I viewed the link, it took me to nice laundry (after skipping the ad). The second time I viewed the link, it took me to the correct article. :/

I'm logged in but still get the error, although my account has very little activity (i only use it for dev purposes).

> Grunt in particular doesn't bring anything to the table that bash scripts don't

One thing that comes to mind is cross-platform builds, which in some scenarios is very useful.

55 external scripts with a plethora of jquery plugins just to show some text content :(

Hmm, I've read reasons why you could code like this, but personally I would never make my code more complicated to read just to prevent errors that I can prevent with other methods, like having tests, for example. I would assume after someone has been coding for a decent amount of time, they would have the experience to spot declaration/assignment mistakes and shouldn't have to rely on yoda conditionals to prevent this. Perhaps there's other reasons I'm not aware of, and am not seeing the light because of that, care to share your thoughts?

Agreed, I follow this styleguide: https://github.com/felixge/node-style-guide

Yup, for example: https://github.com/koajs/koa/blob/master/lib/application.js#...

I have utmost respect for TJ and his work but I am not a fan of his yoda style programming :(

Ironic that I struggle to read the text on this page due to the horrendous colour contrast. I give you the middle finger, fuckthissite.com.

So you can now enforce vagrant versions in your Vagrantfile, which is great, but this is a new feature thus older versions of vagrant won't honour it...so this feature is useless for me, at least for a while. I will continue to do this: https://gist.github.com/badsyntax/7803472

Weird, I get a scrollbar showing I can clearly scroll. Are you an OSX by any chance?

Are you planning on creating the sass-convert utility?

Exactly. There shouldn't be a markup structure to style dependency. Personally I would never use an element selector because it makes life really difficult when you need to refactor the markup, which happens fairly often in my experience. Using classes doesn't make things less semantic as long they are named correctly and as long as the markup is semantic.

Agreed, consistency matters most. Regarding whether it matters whether tabs or spaces are used, I've come to realise that I cannot control the tab length when viewing code outside of my editor (obviously!). So, let's say we have a 80 char line length limit. If I set my tab size to be 2 spaces, the line length is obviously going to be different to someone who sets their tab size to be 4 spaces. Just having the option to control the size of tabs means tabs should never be used as it will result in inconsistencies across editing/viewing environments. Also, when viewing code online, generally you have a limited viewing area. If you're using tabs, the length of the lines are generally going to be very long, and it's very difficult to view the code. In conclusion, if you care about things like line lengths (you should), and if you care about keeping your code in a certain and consistent format, the only way to manage it is with spaces, imo.

I would recommend splitting out the monolithic Gruntfile.js into individual config and task files. It makes it easier to read, in my opinion. I've put together an example here: https://github.com/badsyntax/gruntfile

What's up with the line-length limit on these comments? https://raw.github.com/gravityonmars/nodejs-starter/master/i...

It's cut off on my 13" MacBook Air on chrome.

What do you mean by "CoffeScript is JS"? CoffeeScript is not JavaScript. CoffeeScript compiles to JavaScript.

I would probably only use labels for breaking out of nested loops, for example: https://gist.github.com/badsyntax/5317545

It's hipster because it goes against the accepted standard way of writing Javascript. See https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1547647&utm_source=twit...

I'm just say that the colour contrast is atrocious. I've got pretty good eye sight and the text on that screenshot looks blurry. Both the unvisited and visited link states fail at AA colour contrast accessibility levels.

[edit] - It took me a while to find the install link. I thought it was a heading. Why don't you use an underline for links?

This solves all issues but unfortunately is not well supported in the older browsers :(

I agree with your points. Polling is not the right approach IMO. A much simpler approach would be to use the following script as a bookmark, and hit the bookmark when you want to see the changes:

javascript:(function(){var%20s,i,x;x=document.getElementsByTagName('link');for(i=0;i<x.length;i++){x[i].href=x[i].href+'?'+new%20Date().getTime();}})();