Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 1 year ago.
Improve this question
I'm trying to choose a widget layout and I have come across:
gridstack: http://troolee.github.io/gridstack.js/
gridster: http://gridster.net/enter link description here
Any one used these before who can share the pros and cons and features?
Gridster is a great library built by Ducksboard who were acquired some time back. At this time, to the best of my understanding, they have ceased development and the fork community is not very active.
Gridstack is an active project at this time. It's openly states it was inspired by Gridster and so should offer much the same functionality, if not all, in time. Gridstack is not a rebuild of Gridster, however, and aims to improve upon the concept. For example, it supports responsive layouts, becoming a vertical stack of widgets on smaller format screens.
Gridstack is the way to go if you're looking for a library like this these days.
I have used Gridstack since .63 and like it very much. I built it using JQuery, and will be porting it to react soon. I would give this library a 9 out of ten.
Related
Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 2 years ago.
Improve this question
Do you use bootstrap, semantic ui or any other library for building web pages, or do you directly code the html and css yourself?
I am curious whether developers use the frameworks or prefer the traditional way of doing things?
Please tell.
Always depends on what you want.
If It's about get the shit done very quickly and with a good Ui, use bootstrap or another libraries, but if you something very unique, you make your own styles.
But generally we use a combination of both, libraries and our own styles when is necessary.
Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 4 years ago.
Improve this question
i am working on a website using polymer using Git ,now i need to remove and add feature to the website
so is the best way to do that :
forking the old website and edit/add/ remove feature .
starting new website from zero.
i was thing if i chose to fork i will get lot of messy code so what should i do?
Get yourself an structure plan draw.io
and think if you can create something like an internal api ( maybe overkill) or create modules of your features
Create an adittional diagram of your features and where these have connections to others.
Now create the fork and prepare your work before you implement new features
If your project gets bigger you maybe should get yourself an structure like the v-model
Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 5 years ago.
Improve this question
I have a legacy Ruby on Rails API project, I notice that the project uses both active_model_serializer and Jbuilder. There are app/serializers diretory for active_model_serializer, and app/view/api/ for Jbuilder.
I'm new to Ruby on Rails API. From what I have read from the internet it seems active_model_serializer and Jbuilder are both used to deal with JSON data, there's even an article arguing which one is better.
I don't know which one is better, but is it a good practice to use both?
There's no problem in using both, but it's definitely not a good practice. It can be confusing for new people coming to the project. I'd say it's ok to use both if you transition from one to the other (most often from Jbuilder to AMS), but it's good to eventually stick with one of them.
Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 6 years ago.
Improve this question
I have recently discovered that a new stable version of StarUML (StarUML 2) has been released after the project being abandoned for a long time.
WhiteStarUML is a fork from the original StarUML project that provides modern continuation of the project using up-to-date development tools and libraries.
What are the pros and cons of both tools?
I've used the both original StarUML(Unfortunately, it was abandoned so long time because it was developed as a commercial program first by a company in South Korea... but the company went bankrupt.) and StarUML2.0 I think WhiteStarUML is not very different from the original one.
StarUML2.0 is much better to see - anyway it is prettier. It's undeniable. :) and UI looks better. - But I felt it is a little bit uncomfortable when I draw some kind of diagrams... for me, especially sequence diagram. I guess it is because I'm familiar with the original StarUML.
What I want to say is, I think StarUML2.0 can be a little bit unfamiliar for users who have been using StarUML1 for long time. But If you want to show your diagram in your presentation, I recommend you to use StarUML2.0.
+) Now staruml 2.0 is charged. Personal license is $70. If you are a student, you need to pay only $49. The original starUML 5.0 is still for free.
Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 9 years ago.
Improve this question
I noticed https://beta.icloud.com/ didn't use SVG which surprised me. Here Apple is on the cutting-edge using things like background: -webkit-canvas(animation) and they're not using SVG on what seems like a perfect place to use it. I want to delve deep into SVG but before I do I want to understand its limitations. When I see demos like this Mozilla demo it doesn't seem like it has major problems. What would be the reasons a large corporation, for example, would not use SVG?
There are relatively few "problems" with using SVG today. For the most part, it's a question of fit and familiarity - there are a lot of problems where the solution is to dynamically draw to a raster buffer. That is, canvas.
However, for Apple, the problem is that Safari has the worst of SVG compatibility of any major browser (at least, the last time I tested it). They want their sites to work in Safari.