miscellaneous If you're subscribed to my RSS feed you wouldn't have noticed, but if not you probably already know by now about the change in the look of unethicalblogger.com. I got tired of the old (boring) red theme and dug around on drupal.org until I found one I liked and then customized it to suit my needs.

Other than that, I'm very proud to announce that this site is the 7th hit on Google for the query "unethical" (check it out). Besides the obvious tactics (kicking puppies), I'm wondering how I can reach the #1 result for "unethical".

Any ideas?

slide miscellaneous javascript Since I've come from the land of desktop application development, there are a few concepts that I don't think quite "made the voyage" from desktop/thick-client development to web/thin-client development. The concept of "data binding" is completely lost in my opinion in the land of Javascript and HTML (not to mention the concept of "controls" to begin with).A few weeks ago while exploring a couple other concepts for how to improve our overall frontend development at Slide I prototyped a means of "databinding" controls, or at the very least DOM elements to data-providing Javascript functions.

I've posted an example here of some of the data binding code I've written for experimentation purposes. In the example page linked, there is a <ul> tag that is "bound" to a Javascript function, the Javascript function creates an array of associative arrays inline (it could very well be powered by some AJAX-oriented Javascript with minor adjustments). Using the results of the "databind" function specified on the bindable element, it creates a set of child nodes to attach to the parent list. In effect, the following code:

Will generate the following DOM tree, after the "bind()" function has been run on page load:

• List Item #1 OMG


• List Item #2


• List Item #3

Since the code is relatively simple (in my opinion) I figured I would throw it out there in all it's minimalistic glory and get some general feedback on the concept before I go "all out" and create a full-on jQuery extension based off of the linked prototype above. I'm trying to think of ways to make it more powerful as well, built-in support for binding to the results of an asynchrounous call to a URL that returns JSON that would then create the elements is at the top of my TODO list at this point. Feedback, flames and actual useful critiques are all welcome; I'll be sure to post again once I have the time to create the jQuery extension for binding, this however is more experimental quality (i.e. don't use it, i'm not).

What do you think?

---

Did you know! Slide is hiring! Looking for talented engineers to write some good Python and/or JavaScript, feel free to contact me at tyler[at]slide

miscellaneous linux With the release of Mac OS 10.5 (Leopard) I found myself in a tough spot, I liked certain features added into Leopard, but I couldn't stand some of the stability issues I was having and the other bugs that would interrupt my normal workflow during the day. In an effort to alleviate some of my frustrations with Leopard, I experimented for a week with running Gnome (with Compiz) on my openSUSE workstation. In general all the important bits were there, By this point, I had already switched from using any sort of GUI editor to work, but instead had switched over to using vim on a shared development server here at the office. Given that Drosera still wasn't fast enough for my normal day-to-day web development debugging, I was also using Firefox and Opera for most of my web browsing as well. Chat was covered by Adium, so using it's Linux/Windows counter-part, Pidgin was no trouble at all.

After switching for a week and falling in love with Compiz and some of the features it offers, I feel like I can accomplish far more now on Linux than I was on Mac OS X. For me Mac OS X became the new Windows, I was fighting the system to work almost as much as I was do actual work (between the IMAP code in Mail.app crashing and Safari leaking, I was not a happy camper). The one missing feature however was Dashboard. I'm not a religious user of Dashboard, but I always used it to keep little chunks of information stored away either in post-it notes, via clocks, or tickers, etc. I'd not found a good solution until recently, by way of Opera and a combination of widgets and one of the default Compiz Fusion plugins.

(click to enlarge)

The concept behind Opera Widgets is the exact same as behind Dashboard widgets, tiny little web applications running on your desktop, by default however they run on your desktop. This wasn't going to work for me, I like to stash widgets away, and access them through the trusty F12 button as per usual with Dashboard.

In enters the "Widget Layer" plugin for Compiz Fusion , which allows you to assign rules for placing regular windows sitting in the window manager, into this special widget layer that appears just like Dashboard does on Mac OS X (with the actual desktop faded out in the background). In order to group all Opera Widgets in the Widget Layer, you can set the "Widget Windows" field to:
role=opera-widget
Which will cause all enabled Opera Widgets to be availabe at a keypress of F12, if you're on Linux, I highly suggest you try it out, it's extremely useful, especially if you grab some of the more developer focused widgets from the widget directory

Of course, there's plenty of reasons to use Compiz. One of my favorite plugins is the "Annotate" plugin that allows you to draw on your screen, which comes in handy for going over interfaces with coworkers.

In general the addition of Compiz to the Linux desktop I feel is an important one, it drastically improves the rendering of windows since it's essentially doing what Quartz Extreme is doing on Mac OS X in terms of offloading some rendering on the graphics card's GPU. Having really bitching eye-candy certainly doesn't hurt either, So far with Compiz I have what equates to "Spaces", "Expose", and "Dashboard" from Leopard, along with a myriad of other goodies like "Wobbly Windows", true transparency and reflections on arbitrary UI elements and of course, a fish tank inside my desktop. (If you're using openSUSE, the one-click packages for Compiz Fusion can be found here on the wiki).

opinion software development javascript Via twitter I have been griping a bit about Javascript recently. It's quite possible that I've been complaining about it far more than I complain about other things via twitter, which is a tall order to match.

When addressing something as big and scary as say, a platform built on Javascript, it forces you into looking at Javascript in a way different than how I think most developers (myself included) have looked at Javascript. Most Javascript that I've seen has been hideous. Gobs and gobs of functions and procedural garbage thrown into a series of files that kinda makes sense, but really doesn't. It would seem that most developers charged with writing Javascript don't understand how to write object-oriented Javascript. In fact about two or three months ago when considering topics to discuss in a front-end developers meeting here at Slide, I bit the bullet, raised my hand and said "Can you explain how to do object-oriented Javascript? Because I honestly don't have a fucking clue."

In the past Javascript that I've written has been to compliment existing backend web-application code and front-end code, i.e. I wasn't looking at Javascript as one of the building blocks of my application, I was looking at it as a bit of mortar spread between the cracks to smooth out the surface of the application. The difference in how you start to use Javascript in a web application makes an enormous difference 6 months to a year down the road. How terrible your code (this isn't actually segregated to Javascript) is becomes far more apparent when other developers start to work with your code as well, it's tremendously embarrassing to have to answer questions like "where's the code that generates that one DOM element?" As a general rule, coding all by your lonesome, especially with a tight schedule, will produce less than clean results (unfortunately Javascript is one of the languages I've found where this is more of the norm than the exception).

A lot of what's driven the change from my Javascript being the mortar to being the bricks in my work has been the adoption of jQuery which I highly recommend along with the jQuery.ui library. jQuery makes developing Javascript feel like actual programming, instead of hackish-scripting, which means you'll start to view your Javascript code differently too. Dealing with scoping issues, and prototype-based programming in Javascript isn't all rainbows and butterflies but "doing it right" will help you sleep at night and help reduce the amount of embarrassing questions you'll have to answer to the next poor unfortunate soul that inherits your code.

Some of the resources I've found useful in getting over the barrier to object-oriented Javascript have been:

• This Introduction to Object-Oriented Javascript on the Mozilla Developer Center
• Almost anything John Resig writes, especially gems like his recent post on Simple Javascript Inheritance
• The code included in some mainstream javascript libraries

I'm still not a huge fan of Javascript, but I'm hating it less these days :)

slide miscellaneous software development javascript I've been doing work with OpenSocial recently and have used the opportunity to bring my tolerance talent in Javascript up a notch or two. In doing so, I've been slowly but surely running into a myriad of browser-specific quirks along with a few cross-browser gems that have left me thinking about putting some browser developers on my "To Anonymously Beat Up In Alleyway" list (so far, James Gosling, and this man top the list).

After working on a few "classes" tonight (the notion that Javascript is object-oriented still makes me chuckle) I ran into an interesting problem with some of my global-level "constants" defined in the same file that I was working in, that my "class" just so happened to make use of. As I tend to do when I fall into situations like this to where I can't tell if I'm hallucinating or if something with Javascript has gone awry, I called over Sergio (in-house CSS master and Javascript Lvl. 60 Mage).

Some background to how Javascript works
Javascript engines essentially have two "modes" that it runs over your code that you can spot errors in. The first mode, "parsing", is where you'll find syntax errors spewing into the Javascript console. If you've used any interpreted language before (Python, Java, C#, Ruby), this is really just "compilation". Using Python as an example, when you import a module (i.e. import some_module) the Python interpreter actually compiles your code into Python byte-code to be executed at a later date. The second mode, "execution", is where you'll run into your run-time errors, using an accessing an undefined object property, overrunning an array index, etc. In Python/Java terms, this is where your compiled byte-code is actually being run in the Python/Java virtual machine.


The gripe
The crux of the problem comes down to two different ways to declare an associative array in Javascript, the following two notations are both correct and both "work":
Notation #1
var mapped_values = {};
mapped_values['key'] = 'value';

Notation #2
var mapped_values = {'key' : 'value'};

Everything looks correct yes? (hint: say yes)



Incorrect, because of the point at which the two are evaluated. The first example will be notated at run-time, whereas the second example will be evaluated at parse/compile-time. Who cares right? The distinction becomes much more apparent when you start to use references to other code for your keys. Keep in mind, with both notations it is actually valid to have a key "undefined" when you declare your associative array. For example:

Notation #1
/* the variable "foo" is not defined */
var mapped_values = {};
mapped_values[foo] = 'value';

Notation #2
/* the variable "foo" is not defined */
var mapped_values = { foo : 'value' };


This still works perfectly fine, both at parse/compile-time and at run-time. Since I mentioned I'm working on OpenSocial, chances are I'm going to need to reference some of the OpenSocial code. So for the next example let's say I need to create an associative array with one of the keys defined by the OpenSocial container, using the two different notations I would write something like:
Notation #1
var mapped_values = {};
mapped_values[opensocial.DataRequest.PeopleRequestFields.FILTER] = opensocial.DataRequest.FilterType.ALL;

Notation #2
var mapped_values = {opensocial.DataRequest.PeopleRequestFields.FILTER : opensocial.DataRequest.FilterType.ALL};


Because of the different points in time at which the two notations above will be evaluated, #1 will properly "compile" and then execute correctly when called (regardless of the scope-level at which it is defined). The second one however, will fail to "compile" when the browser's rendering engine is loading the Javascript (also regardless of the scope-level at which it is defined), and will result in the following error at load-time:
"missing : after property id"
(verified in both IE6 and Firefox)

The issue here is that the variable "opensocial" is not defined at "compile-time" as far as the Javascript engine is concerned (which is fine) but the code attempts to access a property of that object, which causes the error at "compile-time". This will error at at *any* level (as far as I've tried) so it's not a scoping issue, just an unfortunate fact of life with how Javascript is loaded and eventually executed in the browser.


Sergio and I tried a few more examples (the scope of which was in side a function, not at the global level):

// Works in IE/FF
var test = { magic : 'thing' };
var test2 = {};
test2[rick.roll] = 'thing';
test2[alert] = 'somethingelse';
var test3 = {};
test3[function() { alert('sux'); }] = 'test';



// Fail in IE/FF
var test4 ={ opensocial['DataRequest']['PeopleRequestFields']['FILTER'] : opensocial['DataRequest']['FilterType']['ALL']} ;
var test5 = { rick['roll'] : 'thing'};
var test6 = { rick.roll : 'thing'};
var test7 = { function() { alert('sux'); } : 'test'};


Object accessor calls work in "test2" for example because that's going to be evaluated at run-time instead of at compile-time, as is happening in "test5" and "test6". I would love to be proven wrong on our analysis of the issue here (our tests were less than scientific, and there may have been Corona involved) but switching from inline-declarations for associative arrays (var t = {'k' : 'v'};) to the more sequential alternative (var t = {}; t['k'] = 'v';) solved the issue of the Javascript engine's parser spewing errors on the loading of the Javascript.

Food for thought I suppose.

slide facebook It's been almost a whole entire week since I left Austin, but it certainly seems better late than never.

So far this month I've been fortunate enough to have been invited to speak at a few events, and one or two I just happened to wedge myself into anyways.

I spoke at Graphing Social Patterns West in San Diego the first week in March on a concept I feel I didn't have the time to really explain sufficiently, "Social Portability" (pdf). Unfortunately most of the audience weren't developers, so I adjusted the presentation to shoot a bit higher level than usual.

Following GSP I spoke at BarCamp Austin 3 on building ASP.NET sites on top of the Mono stack (pdf). The session was relatively small, so it broke down into much more of a round table discussion (we were sitting at a literal round table) about some of our experiences with ASP.NET on Mono through Apache2/mod_mono and Lighttpd/Mono-FastCGI, etc.

Also while at SXSW I spoke at the Facebook Developer Garage Austin on the same concept as before, Social Portability, except this time the audience was far more developer oriented so I could dive into some nitty gritty bits of FBML/FBJS caveats, etc ((pdf). The Developer Garage was especially fun because the Zuckerborg was in attendance, and I met more than my fair share of interesting developer-types that were either Texans themselves, or in Texas for the event.

March is barely half over and I'm already exhausted.

Presentation Files
Social Portability.pdf (GSP)
Social Portability (Developer Garage).pdf
ASP.NET on Mono.pdf (BarCamp)

slide facebook I'm not yet certain what kind of audience is going to be attending Graphing Social Patterns West, so I'm hoping I can help tip the scales in favor of developers because, to be frank, business people scare me.

I was told about AppNite and it seems like a good excuse to try to get more developers to make the trek down to San Diego to keep me company in a sea of marketers and business folk. Better yet, developers who enter the AppNite contests get 50% off the admission to the conference (enter here). Unfortunately I'm not going to enter my apps in the contest, but I do know a friend of mine Jason Rubenstein, of Just Three Words fame, has entered his app, to give you an idea of the stiff competition you'll be up against.

If that doesn't seal the deal for you, Virgin America flies to San Diego now, and round-trip flights from San Francisco to San Diego are only ~$85. Which means if you're a Silicon Valley Facebook/Bebo/OpenSocial developer you can come hang out at the conference for cheap, and if your application is good enough, get some killer exposure to potential investors, business contacts, and other developers (like me!).

Zach Allia (of Free Gifts fame), Jason Rubenstein (Just Three Words), Ryan Romanchuk (Dipity) as well as the developers on the speakers list will all be there, so it should be a fun meeting of the minds (for developers at least).

See you there!

cocoa opinion software development Hate is such a strong word, but I think I can verifiably say that I hate Mac OS X (Leopard). In a past life I wrote Mac software on Mac OS X (Tiger) and everything was wonderful, I enjoyed using Mail, iCal, Xcode, Safari and even iTunes sometimes. I liked using my computer, I enjoyed using the tools handed to me by the gods on high in the mountains of Cupertino.

Now a couple months since upgrading to Leopard certain that everything was going to be even more awesome than before, I type this from my openSUSE 10.3 workstation, running Opera, Thunderbird, Sunbird, Banshee and Gnome Terminals open all over the place. The tipping point was an afternoon at a coffee shop with my lovely MacBook Pro (code named "cherry") when I closed Safari entirely because it was leaking memory, only to open it again for about an hour, and notice that it had started leaking again and in the course of an hour had a memory footprint of 1.3GB.

Using Mail.app in Leopard has been nothing but a complete and total nightmare, somehow Mail.app's internal IMAP implementation can lock up the entire machine causing the Finder, Safari and Terminal all to beachball while Mail.app takes 15 minutes only to end up crashing. Too many stack traces I've watched Mail.app emit have all been rooted in their IMAP support. Thunderbird is also a miserable piece of software, I'm convinced that everybody except the one engineer I know at Mozilla is a complete and utter idiot, but when Thunderbird locks up, I can still use the rest of my system. Somehow Apple has munged the lines between userland and kernel space so much that userland applications can take control of the machine leaving the user on the sidelines while applications compete for resources and bicker amongst themselves.

Time Machine, and Spaces are the only two redeeming features in Leopard for me, but after losing multiple modal dialogs in Spaces and watching iChat or Adium steal focus and rip focus from one space to another became too much to handle. Somehow every window manager on the planet has gracefully supported multiple workspaces for well over a decade and Apple was able to do it wrong.

I really like Apple's hardware, I own a 20" iMac, 13" MacBook, 12" PowerBook and have a 15" MacBook Pro at work, but either Apple let go, or lost some really good engineers in their famed deathmarches up to releases, especially up to the release of Mac OS 10.5. I'm sure the iPhone is a great revenue stream, the Apple TV is "cute" and iPods are still my preferred portable media devices, but I never realized that when "Apple Computer, Inc." became "Apple, Inc" that it was going to have such an effect on the quality of their products.

Now I have a split partition on my MacBook Pro, and I intend on putting openSUSE on the machine this weekend. My trust in the open source community, as low as it is, is now higher than my trust in Apple to release quality software. Grrrr.