This question already has answers here:
Closed 10 years ago.
Possible Duplicate:
Why do browsers create vendor prefixes for CSS properties?
What is the advantage for browsers to use prefixes to implement some technology?
e.g. Google Chrome needs the -webkit- prefix to render some css3-tags, like animation (it needs "-webkit-animation:" to work).
What is the advantage compared to implementing the technique directly into chrome?
Browsers use prefixes so that they can implement a new features before it gets standardized.
Related
This question already has answers here:
Does Javascript have something like Ruby's method_missing feature?
(8 answers)
Closed 7 years ago.
I need some functionality that works like Ruby's method missing. I have searched and only found 2 ways:
noSuchMethod: Only available to Mozilla Firefox, and I think it's
deprecated or something.
ES6 proxys: Not yet implemented in Chrome, which is a major browser,
and partialy implemented in other major ones as per: https://kangax.github.io/compat-table/es6/.
I was thinking in proxies but is a major drawback if isn't supported by Chrome, and if it's not supported by chrome, probably not for NodeJS either.
Any idea how to implement this feature? maybe a library or plain JS prototyping?
This is not possible without a language level feature like proxies or noSuchMethod. The prototype chain suffers from the same problem that any other solution does in that there is no generic way of handling calls to missing methods/properties on an object.
Closed. This question does not meet Stack Overflow guidelines. It is not currently accepting answers.
We don’t allow questions seeking recommendations for books, tools, software libraries, and more. You can edit the question so it can be answered with facts and citations.
Closed 5 years ago.
Improve this question
On windows CHM is a very good option.
Is there anything other then delivering a static set of HTML pages and using a primitive call to a webbrowser (which is even a problem itself on linux). And it would not offer any kind of fulltext searching, separated bookmarks and even the simple fact of not opening a new tab for each help call.
The Gnome yelp program is what is used for GTK/Gnome applications. It supports a number of formats, but not CHM directly. They have started to define their own markup, named Mallard. But I don't know what is the status of that.
I'd still recommend static HTML as the best option (and of course man pages!). For example you can use Sphinx to write beautiful documentation with a full-text search support!
There are CHM viewers available on Linux though frankly as a Linux user I'd prefer to get static HTML pages.
Some examples are chmsee and kchmviewer.
Afaik there is no universal system. Depending on your desktop system (gnome/kde) there might be helpsystems, but they are usually based on loose files and use full-blown browsers. (usually webkit based)
For Lazarus a CHM based helpsystem and embedded browser was created, including CHM write support.
The reasons to avoid loose static html were mostly:
the 60000 lemma static documentation took too long to install on lighter systems or systems with specialist filesystems.
CHM removes slack and adds compression.
we also support non posix and OS X systems, and little filesystem related problems (charsets/encoding, separators, path depth etc) and case insenstive filesystems on *nix caused a lot of grief. The CHM based help solved that, allowing for one set of routines to access helpdata on all systems.
indexing and toc are Btree based, and can be easily merged runtime from independently produced help sets. In general integrating independently produced helpfiles is a underappreciated aspect of helpfiles in general, while key to open platforms.
native fulltext search.
An own viewer also has the ability to take advantage of extra features on top of the base system.
I'm not mentioning the Lazarus system in the hope you adapt it, since it is at the moment too much a development system (SDK) oriented system, the viewer is not even available as a separate package. I mainly mention it to illustrate the problems of loose html.
I haven't investigate KDE/Gnome/Eclipse what they use as helpsystem for a while though. If I would have to restart from scratch, that's where I would look first.
If I had to create something myself quickly, I would use zipped static html, and a single gziped file with metadata/indexes and the lightest browser (Konquerer?) I could find. Not ideal, not like Windows, but apparently the best Linux can offer.
This question already has answers here:
Bash script with graphical menus
(2 answers)
Closed 5 years ago.
Are there some more Text User Interface (TUI) frameworks for bash (other than this)? : http://code.google.com/p/bashsimplecurses/
I want to take user input (data entry)
process the entry
If all you need to do is prompt the user for information, take a look at dialog.
http://invisible-island.net/dialog/dialog.html
bashsimplecurses is pretty capable (from the little I've seen), but you might want to try GTK Server. (Have a look at the docs page for tutorial and manual links). It can work with a large number of scripting languages. Other Stack Exchange users (particularly the UNIX/ BSD/ GNU/Linux lot) recommend using ncurses with Python.
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 8 years ago.
Improve this question
Can anyone please tell me, in what order we've to learn languages?
1.(X)HTML
2.CSS
3.JS, HTML DOM, jQuery (client-side)
4.SQL
5.PHP & MySQL (server-side)
6.Ajax
Am I correct? Is it good to learn "jQuery" before learning PHP & MySQL, SQL, Ajax?
(X)HTML
CSS
(any server side language you want)
(whatever database language you want)
JavaScript
(any javascript library you want)
To summarize. First learn structure, then learn style, then learn the backend languages (and their databases) and then learn JS and whatever library you want with it.
Learn as your projects warrant, You can't learn everything so start with what you're being asked to do and branch out when you find things you enjoy.
You're a bit confused. Neither jQuery nor "HTML DOM" nor MySQL are languages. More importantly, there is not really a fixed order, though certain combinations (e.g. HTML + CSS + JS) are obviously more helpful than others (CSS + SQL).
IMHO, first you need to learn HTTP protocol to understand how those things work. Only then you can begin with pure HTML and JavaScript. Then serverside programming: PHP or whatever language you will like.
Frameworks must be learnt AFTER the basic knowledge of those technologies.
It depend on what you need to work on. If you are only working on front-end you can will need HTML + CSS + JS. IF you are working on back-end and dynamic page generation you will need to learn a server-side stack (i.e. PHP + MySQL or ASP.NET + SQLServer).
I started from the back-end coding and move through to learning HTML + CSS + JS
You're better off with Python instead of PHP if you want to become a programmer, not just crank out sites badly enough.
What's the point of knowing SQL before server-side programming?
XHTML can be dropped altogether or pushed down.
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
In a related question, I asked about Web Development. I came across something called OpenLaszlo yesterday and thought it looked interesting for doing some website development. The site has a bunch of good information on it and they've got some nice tutorials and such, but being a total novice (as far as web development goes), I'm wondering whether anyone here would recommend this. As I stated in my other question, this is a new world for me and there are a lot of directions I could go. Can you compare/contrast this and other web development you've done? Obviously, this is somewhat subjective, but I haven't heard much about it on SO and I'm hoping to get some opinions on this.
I worked on a website for about a year in which the entire UI was developed in Laszlo. I've also developed AJAX applications using JS frameworks such as JQuery, Prototype and Scriptaculous.
In my experience, the total effort required is considerably less when using Laszlo, and the class-based object model helps to keep your code better organised than when using JS frameworks. My only complaints about Laszlo were that:
It "breaks the browser" in terms of support for the back/forward/refresh buttons. This problem also exists with AJAX, but most JS libraries seem to have found a workaround.
No support for internationalization, though none of the JS libraries are any better in my experience
Relatively small user base/community compared to competitors such as GWT, JQuery, etc.
All in all, I thought OpenLaszlo was a pretty good solution for creating rich web-based user interfaces, and has a number of very novel features, e.g. ability to deploy on multiple runtimes (Flash, DHTML, etc.) without requiring any code changes.
Also, I should mention that I haven't used it for almost a year, so it's likely that some progress has been made in recent times on the issues I mentioned above.
Update
5 years since I posted this answer, things have changed considerably. In case anyone is in any doubt, don't use Laszlo, the project is completely moribund.
I used openLaszlo to develop a few blog widgets for some friends of mine (about a year ago) and it was easy enough to get something basic working and it looked OK. But if I had to do it again, I would probably use FLEX I think you can make a more polished looking application in a lot less time using Flex than with Laszlo
You definitely can write a flash app quickly with OpenLaszlo. There are a lot of similarities to developing for Silverlight.
One OpenLaszlo lameness is that it uses a lame variation of javascript similar to ActionScript. Takes a little getting used to, if you are used to the latest features.
Also, the final flash file that you end up with is very large (file size) compared to what you can do with other tools.
One benefit of OpenLaszlo is the possibility of DHTML output. But for me the mix of XML and JavaScript in the same source file was somewhat confusing.