Tested with Chrome dev tools, the repaint troubles disappear. Unfortunately only supported in Chrome, Firefox, and Opera. But just checked, and at least in Chrome the performance problem goes away with this solution even with the will-change removed. YMMV
That's a bit odd, what browser is this? The fixed background should be handled by compositor layers, and while it is certainly more expensive than having a scrolling background, I'm surprised it makes the experience unusable.
There's no javascript on the page at all (with the exception of two IE-compat scripts). The CSS also looks tame enough - a data uri, -webkit-font-smoothing and one Google web font are the only vaguely notable things.
Could be a browser bug on your system? (I see no lag of any kind)
which appears to add a 'gesturestart' event, and a weird conditional comment at the bottom that shouldn't appear for non-IE, but whose condition is to explicitly run the function defined in that script in non-IE browsers...
Sometimes installing an entire programming language just to use one tool is not worth the time I could possibly waste just trying to figure out how to get it working (assuming it works). Instead looking for alternatives built around tech that's already available in my system makes more sense to me, because of a higher chance of familiarity and the benefit of less time possibly wasted.
There's also the curiosity of wanting to see the project implemented in a language you're familiar with.
This is why I advocate that software authors package their software for a variety of OS's in their native format. Yes, technically anyone can use Ruby gems or Python eggs or wheels or whatever Go calls their packages, but practically if I can apt-get/brew/emerge/rpm your package, I don't care what language it is written in. It is more effort but it makes a big difference in adoption IMO.
Well, it has `go get foo` which I'd consider a kind of installer/package manager. That's what I'm referring to since I've seen a good chunk of Go software distributed this way. The README usually says "install Go, then run `go get foo`".
> Sometimes installing an entire programming language just to use one tool is not worth the time I could possibly waste just trying to figure out how to get it working (assuming it works).
That's why I would love to see more Docker containers and docker-compose.yaml files for tools shared on HN. A Docker container for this would be super simple to build using an official Ruby Docker container and it would save so much time for anyone who wants to try the tool.
Docker for a command line tool? I thought docker was more for your public facing service sort of thing. Does it even have a full on terminal, being a container?
I'll be honest I've not been keeping up with Docker. It shows, right?
-t when running a docker container allocates a pseudo-tty.
Docker is useful for trying out cli interpreters like this, iojs, or any thing else of the sort. I wouldn't want to use docker if I planned on keeping it around to use more than a couple of times though.
Well, I've never encountered an ecosystem before where it is so totally painful to install and maintain programs coming from there. It's not necessarily the language but the community mindset that doesn't seem to care one tiny bit about backwards compatibility.
Say I want to run two programs an a server, both written in Ruby. Those programs depend on a bunch of libraries. Ok, so I go on and just install those libraries. WRONG. The programs need specific versions of those libraries (both of which differ from the one coming with my Linux distro) and there's no single library version that works with both of them. To make things worse, one program needs a different version of the Ruby interpreter than the other. Only one of those is included in the Linux distribution I'm running.
So instead of being able to (at least partially) rely on the maintenance done by my Linux distro, I'd have to maintain my own Ruby interpreters and libraries. Yeah, right.
For that reason I consider running Ruby programs a liability. Sure, you have to deal with stuff like that everywhere but I never encountered an ecosystem where things are that bad and things break with any other update. I've heard the Javascript/Node people do an equally crappy job but I'm not going to find out personally.
So while I saw a couple of quite nice things written in Ruby, we're not going to use them if their maintenance is such a pain.
I get sad when I see a ruby tool, and don't bother. I'm lazy.
The ones I've tried have been dependant on a specific version of ruby. So you have to work through that. I'm not a resident of the ruby ecosystem, and I don't want to figure out the "why didn't you just" method of managing that. As the saying goes, it's hard to remember your objective was to drain the swamp when you're up to your ass in alligators.
IIRC, vagrant just includes the version of ruby it depends on. Or maybe it just includes a ruby in case you don't have one. I like and use vagrant.
Can I pre-setup a environment? To debug my service I need to go always to some address, set a referer header, disable SSL and set a cookie before starting. I would be awesome to save a state e continue from it everytime.
Oh wow. This is going in the bookmarks. Last time I did REST work, I had to make do with CocoaRestClient and Swagger, and neither were exactly convenient for some things.
The cookie and auth management alone makes this worth using. Really fantastic program, will definitely displace my usage of various Chrome extensions to get the job done.
The website lags on my laptop. Scrolling lags. Why does scrolling lag? How?
What's going on with the internet these days...