"what does it really mean?"

It means he's a node troll. They take a shot at the dominant frameworks any chance they can get. Node trolls have reached the level of obnoxious arrogance that early Rails developers were once mocked for. Don't feed the trolls.

It's about using the right tool for the job. Most developers never seem to understand that. Everyone seems to want the same magic bullet for everything.

I'm not sure if you're joking. Github is Git as a service... it's not in the business of software best practices.

Are you suggesting that Github starts tracking all major frameworks, all versions of said frameworks, and the files that should maybe not be version controlled within each of those frameworks/versions?

A simple example...

    // Less
    .rounded-corners (@radius: 5px) {
        -webkit-border-radius: @radius;
        -moz-border-radius: @radius;
        -ms-border-radius: @radius;
        -o-border-radius: @radius;
        border-radius: @radius;
    }

    // Sass + Compass
    .rounded-corners {
        // All vendor prefixes are generated for you
        @include border-radius(5px); 
    }

I'm sure there are plugins for Less that can accomplish the same. I just grabbed this code from the Less homepage.

Another thing... Sass has much nicer control flow (if/else, while, for) that can create very powerful mixins.

I think that Less has actually won the popularity race thanks to Bootstrap, a nicer website/docs, and front end devs not wanting to learn how to install Ruby. I think it's unfortunate because Sass is technically superior, imo.

http://cdn.css-tricks.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/Charts-...

(Could be skewed by the audience participating in the poll, of course.)

Correct, LESS is all I use right now because of Bootstrap. I don't get it though, LESS is open source. If it's so inferior, why aren't there more pull requests to make it better?

I'd imagine it's because people who aren't satisfied with Less are using/contributing to Sass instead... and vice versa. ;)

There are also big differences in design philosophy. I love the if/else, while, and for options that Sass provides, but Less has chosen to forgo that for (imo) a clunkier syntax. Things like that are unlikely to change.

> Things like that are unlikely to change.

Breaks my heart...

I'd say start with ack for its ease of use, but knowing grep is important. I prefer ack but most of the boxes i work on don't have ack installed (and won't).

Also, these aren't particularly good examples of ack vs grep... as others have pointed out.

What is not clear about "black or khaki pants only"?

I'm quite surprised that you've chosen to identify with the petulant, knife-wielding child in this article.

Sure feels like you're bringing some personal baggage to the equation... this article is too short on details to draw the conclusions that you have.

This woman is insane and belongs in a mental institution, not her kids. This article articulates exactly what I think

http://www.slate.com/blogs/xx_factor/2012/12/17/i_am_adam_la...

I for one always identify myself with a sad kid. Why should not I? I was a kid and I was sad too and I could become mad if told what pants to wear.

This is not just a sad kid and this is not just about pants. Did you ever grab a knife and threaten to kill your mom in front of your 7 and 9 year old siblings?

You're avoiding discussing action by discussing reaction.

Of course grabbing a knife is not good, but that if all his bizzare reactions are due to kinds of nonsense?

Google has over 15,000 patents from their acquisition of Motorola mobile.

Mostly very specific wireless hardware patents, am I wrong?

To put it simply: Yes

I doubt that the CoffeeScript-haters would accept any compile-to-js language. Maybe it's language stockholm syndrome. ;)

But for me, JavaScript's shortcomings are far worse than CoffeeScript's.

I always prefer text as well. I can get the information quicker and if I'm looking for a particular piece of information I don't have to scrub through a whole screencast.

I don't see why the author needs to add a "what is D3" section to a tutorial. A visitor to a tutorial site for library_x is pretty likely to know what the purpose of library_x is.

I think he's targeting his audience well. I'd imagine most of his users arrive like this...

  1) I need a data visualization library.
  2) D3 seems to be a good one.
  3) Read the D3 docs at the project's homepage.
  4) I still need help learning D3.
  5) Google for tutorials.
  6) End up at this person's tutorial.

"What is D3" would make sense if users did this in reverse (like I'm sure some people clicking on this news item have done), but I don't think that's the normal use case and I don't blame the author for not addressing it.

Disagree. I (thought) I know roughly what D3 is, but it would still be nice to have a (single paragraph, even) introduction. A framework can be pretty broad, so the intro would also signal what the author beliefs D3 is useful for and what techniques he intends to teach the audience.

For these reasons, I hold that any piece of technical writing needs an introduction, no matter how familiar the intended audience is. It doesn't need to be long. But it does need to have its place (at the beginning).

HOWEVER! Either we all overlooked this: http://code.hazzens.com/d3tut/lesson_0.html (because this article links straight to lesson one) or the author has added an introduction in the mean time, because it does have an introduction :) So, all is good :)

(BTW I thought that D3 also brought a 3D framework to the canvas, but I see no mention of that anywhere--maybe I"m confused with the name and something else?)

also, I love the first line of the intro:

    D3 is a powerful tool, but you know how that saying goes: 
    "With great power comes a conceptually clean library with a 
    learning curve like a wall". 

I don't care if it's true or not, good writing :)