sortable tables in HTML are nearly impossible to implement.
This is definitely a solvable (and solved) problem.
and where do you sort? front end or back end? how much data are processing?
If you have all the data loaded clientside, sort it there. Otherwise, just make a call to the server to query for data compliant with the new sort order. Both methods are fairly low cost.
I recently worked on a friend's macbook and this is the first thing I noticed; I'm a linux guy. After a less then ten second explanation, I got used to it.
Personally, I thought it was a nice touch - there's almost no added cost to the user, more importantly, it cleans up the interface and frees up a few px of width.
At my school, there are only a few classes that are different between Software Engineering and Computer Science majors. CSC students have a little more focus into theoretical computing and theory, whereas SE tends to be more practical with classes on things like the software development process.
I'm currently taking computer engineering and I really enjoy it. It is a mix of CSC and EE and unlike our CSC or SE majors, it requires taking higher level math and physics courses which are needed to analyze complicated circuits. I've grown to like developing software more, but it is valuable and interesting to learn about hardware as well.
Take whichever sounds more interesting to you, but in the long run, there isn't much of a difference. Also, you should be able to take some technical electives to learn specific skills.
It looks like jQuery versions get updated occasionally in that repo, but you'll have to check and see when 1.7 gets put in.
My recommendation would be to maintain dependency versions yourself, i.e. download the version of jQuery you want to use and //= require jquery in application.js - then grab a new version of jQuery whenever you want it updated
It’s not very common to actually code anything in Ruby. You pretty much only see people coding Ruby while using the Rails framework which governs the whole thing.
This seems like an unfair generalization. I have come across many large non-Rails Ruby projects, e.g. Homebrew, CloudFoundry, Fog. A lot of reasons why Ruby and the like are good for web development also extend to other types of development.
The single page aspect is mostly just for 'slickness' - content is displayed instantly, animations are used and the page only needs to be loaded once. It is becoming more popular among the web; many portfolio sites that I come across are on a single page. The portfolio, business card, resume, etc... type site is well suited for a single page since they are simple, slickness is fairly important and search engine rankings aren't as important.
A side benefit of Pagify is that it DRYs up what would otherwise be duplicated elements in content sites with static HTML pages, i.e. header, navigation and footer - and without any serverside processing.
That being said, a single page and this plugin in particular, certainly aren't the best option for all sites. The reason I made this was to make the development cost virtually the same for developing single page sites.
Good point. The first URL is really how the page is intended to be accessed.
I'm going to work on an option to enable using pushState for navigation which would use hashless URLs. The only downside is that users would have to enter the site through the base URL or some JS would have to be included in each content page.
Thanks for the feedback, really got me thinking about how to add pushState support!
Experience is more important than achievement.