You forgot "don't say 'thank you for pointing out that we were sending social security numbers to everyone who visits our website that anybody could stumble across,' but rather 'you will be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law, hacker!'" Courtesy of the Missouri Department of Education.
alr
joined 1 year ago
Probably for the best.
I got news for you. If you're not a citizen of the country you're located in and you don't have a work visa for that country, you're probably working illegally, whether or not your employer realizes. (Some exceptions for EU citizens, Canada, etc.)
Re: too lazy for Let's Encrypt, a) last I used LE (for my personal site), your site had to be publicly available on the Internet so that you could prove you controlled the site. Most test servers are not public. and b) many (most?) companies would throw a fit if you started generating your own certificates for their domains.
But there are always solutions. I was able to talk my company into getting properly signed certs for our test servers.
I'm not sure I want my banking apps to store anything on my phone in the first place. But maybe that's just me. I don't even use banking apps.
If you use JavaScript, you've probably seen a monad, since Promise is a monad. Unit is Promise.resolve(), bind is Promise.then(). As required, Promise.resolve(x).then(y) === y(x) (unit forms a left identity of bind), y.then(Promise.resolve) === y (unit forms a right identity of bind), and x.then(y.then(z)) === x.then(y).then(z) (bind is essentially associative).
You even have the equivalent of Haskell's fancy do-notation (a form of syntactic sugar to save writing unit and bind all over the place) in the form of async/await. It's just not generalized the way it is in Haskell.
Rather than messing with the EventListener, wouldn't it be easier to just throttle the function that it calls? You can find a bunch of articles online that will explain how to implement a throttle (and also a debouncer, which is similar, but not quite what you're looking for; a throttle allows a function to be called immediately unless it's already been called too recently, while a debouncer waits every time before calling the function and restarts the wait timer every time someone tried to call the function).
Me too. I got a MacBook for testing Safari, but sometimes I take it to meetings because it's easier than extricating my usual machine from its dock (which unplugs the Ethernet cable so all my SSH sessions die along with anything running in them). But as somebody who likes having things in full screen (it bothers me if I can see the desktop peeking through), I get very annoyed needing to scroll through every app I've got open until I stumble across the one I want every time I have to switch context.
Unless you're on a contract. If you're in the US and you're not sure if you're on a contract, you're not on a contract. At-will goes both ways.
Check what your testing organization is using first. We're using Selenium at work, except for one small team that used Cypress because they couldn't be bothered to find out what the test of us were using, so now that team is faced with either maintaining their own version of the CI pipeline and their own tooling (and not having anyone to ask for advice) or rewriting all of their tests. Not an enjoyable choice to have to make.
This 100%. Part of my job is writing test cases, which can be extremely repetitive. With multiple cursors, I can frame out a dozen or more cases simultaneously and then go through and fill in the details. It significantly reduces typing time.
Also, if you work with any sort of XML or HTML, learn Emmett abbreviations and learn them properly. It will take you an hour to learn them properly, but they save so much time over typing tedious tags longhand. Being able to type html>(head>meta[charset=utf-8]/+title{My page})+body saves so much time over
<html>
<head>
<meta charset="utf-8"/>
<title>My page</title>
</head>
<body>
</body>
</html>
NEMA has called them "plugs" and "receptacles" for decades.