DEV Community: donoberry

Monolithic vs Micro service

donoberry — Mon, 12 Apr 2021 04:50:47 +0000

A fight since the dawn of time, monolithic vs micro service. What is the better service architecture? Monolithic applications are built as one unit. Hence the prefix "mono" (not the disease Sam Darnold had) This is a real graphic the New York Jets created.

A monolithic application has a database, user interface, and server side application. Monolithic is the traditional way to create. It is what all the old heads used. The new wave is microservices.

Microservices use oriented APIs. This allows a lot more flexibility. Microservice is service oriented architecture. It makes the application a collection of loosely coupled services.

One benefit of micro services is scalability. Each micro service is independent from each other, so each micro service can be modified and scaled independently. Changes can be made on the fly with no downstream impact.

One interesting criticism of micro services I read about was how HTTP is used, but HTTP was designed for public facing applications, not micro services. Also micro services have more up front costs.

This article helped me understand what a micro service is and what the advantages and disadvantages are.
This article showed the differences between micro services and monolithic structure.

Check out my YouTube video

Shall we web component?

donoberry — Mon, 29 Mar 2021 03:29:23 +0000

Hello there, you are probably wondering if web components are something you should use. Web Components are growing in popularity. Check out the graph. . That image and more basic web component info comes from here.

Web components are custom elements that are open source. They can be picked up and used by anyone. There are so many tech stacks. Applications can built using Angular, React, Ember, Vanilla JavaScript, or basic HTML. Web components are functional, yet separate from the code. They can exist in any of these environments.

Web components can help expand the HTML tags. Web components can mix together. Web components from different libraries can mixed on the same page.

Using web components can be more efficient for businesses because web components work with any Javascript framework. Web components can make it easier on developers. Something does not need to be created every time, just create a web component once, and then share it across the company. This also ensures accuracy. If the web component is correct, it will create the same thing each time. There will be less coding error. This link has some more info on why to use web components.
Thanks to the open source nature, improvements can happen faster, as more eyes can look at the web component. They also can be shared faster.

This article by Benny Powers (amazing name) takes a deeper dive into web components.

YouTube (ever heard of it?) uses web components. I inspected the webpage and we can see the web component tags YouTube uses. You can then go here to learn what that web component does. It allows users to define their own icon sets that contain svg icons.

EA uses web components. They do not appear to have any micro transactions or loot boxes in their source code.

Even this newspaper, my central jersey, uses web components. The iron-ajax element "declaratively exposes network request functionality to Polymer's data-binding system." Don't pretend like you know what that means. New Jersey sucks and they still have web components. New Jersey is just garbage overflowing from New York City. There is no reason for you to not try them out too, if New Jersey can do it.

Here is a video discussing web components.

Git Away From Me

donoberry — Mon, 22 Feb 2021 04:10:36 +0000

Git isn't Github?

I thought these were the same thing up until maybe a week ago. Apparently they aren't. I had some trouble trying to distinguish the two. During my research, I also learned Java is not similar to, or related to Javascript. Whoever decided to name these things so similar, you suck. Be unique.

Git is an extremely popular version control system. It has a branching model that allows people to create independent branches in the code. So like the original code is the trunk of the tree, and people can create tree branches off the trunk to make the tree bigger and better. That analogy could be wrong, but the tree branch thing makes too much sense. Git is downloaded to a local machine.

GitHub makes using Git easier. GitHub is a Git repository hosting service. GitHub is cloud based. Clouds are better. GitHub allows for collaboration on projects in real time. GitHub seems to be very useful for projects, but I have never used it so I cannot confirm that. GitHub uses commits to make changes. The workflow on GitHub is "commit, pull, push". "Commit" is the changes you made, "pull" reviews the changes, "push" makes the official changes.
This article helped me learn more about the differences of Git and GitHub.

Commits

Commits are what I consider to be save points in a code's history. Commits are used to update code. Undoing a commit could cause problems. If someone deletes a commit, you still have that commit. When the changes get pushed, the most common response from Git is to put the deleted commit back in the history.

Praying this is funny because I don't know what it means.

Version Control

Version Control allows you to keep track of your code, and the changes that you have made. This is something pretty critical to have when you are working on a group project. People can be making changes to the code at any time, and I imagine it is helpful to be able to see all of the changes. You will have access to online backups, thanks to version control.

Here lies the Youtube video, may it rest in peace

If you didn't like this blog post

GirlsGoneGolfing... isn't as bad as I thought.

donoberry — Mon, 15 Feb 2021 05:12:13 +0000

GirlsGoneGolfing is a female golf clothing apparel brand created by my grandmother in her post retirement life. She has a website girlsgonegolfing.com. It doesn't look like it has been updated in a while, but the copyright is up to date. I am not sure if she still even sells anything, or if the company was ever profitable. She used to go to golf shows around the northeast.
Anyway, enough about a probably dead company you don't care about. Lets see how the audits were.

If we can all keep a secret here, I figure my grandma's website would be dogshit, all due respect. Nothing personal, I just assumed the website wouldn't be the best. The performance score of 92 was very high. All the other categories were in the yellow, so some room to improve. The biggest change the performance section had was to preload key requests. Believe it or not, I did't know what that meant, so upon some review this can be done by using <link rel=preload>. This basically goes ahead of the loading process and starts to load things that are requested later in the page. This will make the page load faster. The loading process is basically working ahead of the page. I don't think anyone goes to the page, so it doesn't really matter how fast it loads.

Eliminating render blocking services would also increase the page loading speed. All of these URLs are blocking the first paint of the webpage.

I am on a fast internet connection, but for those on a slow connection, the loading speed would drastically increase because external scripts are injected using document.write(). Document.write is blocked on Chrome.

In the accessibility section (score of 82), there are not any headings, skip links, or landmark regions. Attention users without a mouse trying to use this website: sorry. It's gonna be a bitch. Screen readers will have to move through every link. The HTML element also does not have a [lang] attribute. The language of the website is not declared, so screen readers might not read the website correctly. The links do not have a discernible name. Again, sorry if you are using a screen reader. I went through the source code, and it looks like the only links that don't have names are the links at the top of the page to: home, products, about us, etc.

Best practices (score of 64). Ok grandma, this website doesn't even use https, what are we doing. HTTPS is secure, and if golf apparel transactions are happening on this website, I wouldn't feel safe entering my credit card info on a http website. Thankfully, I don't show for female golf apparel. There was a problem of the imagines loading in a one size fits all style. The exact problem was "serve responsive images". Pictures should be resized based on what screen size they are going to. There should be different imagine sizes depending on who is requesting the website. The website lacks the HTML doctype <!DOCTYPE html>. I am not sure how, I thought this was always the first thing to put in HTML code.

The SEO (score of 77) had problems that left it not very mobile friendly. I checked on my phone, and the website isn't optimized at all for mobile use. The desktop version loads on my iPhone (yes I am slave to Apple). No <meta name="viewport"> tag with width or initial-scale was found. Search engines will rank websites based on how mobile friendly they are. Without that tag, the website gives you the desktop view even if you aren't on a desk top. I'd imagine search engines have girlsGoneGolfing last on their rankings, kind of like Dasani when you rank best water brands. There also was a flag that font sizes are too small on mobile devices, which is true, you have to pinch and zoom to read. Places to tap, like buttons and links, are also too small. All of these problems would be fixed if the viewport tag was there, so the page could be optimized for mobile viewing. There is no way around it girlsgonegolfing.com is an enemy of mobile users, not a friend.

So overall, a good website if you go back to before the smartphones took over. The website looks like it belongs in the prehistoric, presmartphone era, probably because that was the last time it was maintained. It lacks HTTPS (sheesh) and doesn't give the slightest shit if you are a mobile user. Pinch and zoom, peasant.

Also if you want to buy some apparel, there is still a bunch of it in the spare bedroom at my grandma's house. Please inquire if interested. (paid advertisement)

YouTube link to a video of me talking about this is here

Expert Review of React & LitElement

donoberry — Thu, 11 Feb 2021 07:03:46 +0000

Ha, that was click bait, I don't understand any of this. I have one semester of Java under my belt, that's it. Let us dive in and dissect whatever React & LitElement are.

I can say with 99% confidence that these both involve Javascript. I can also responsibly speculate that they are both open source. From what I have read/watched it appears that they both are ?good? for creating web components. I have played around with both React & LitElement. ~~I didn't have fun, so it wasn't really playing.~~ Let's see how poorly I understand these.

As someone with an absolute basic understanding of coding, I found the tutorial for LitElement to be more beneficial for me. I was overwhelmed with the react tutorial. React jumps right in with making a god damn tic tac toe game, that's next level gaming/coding that I wasn't ready for. While, yes I am sure the basics got covered with the React tutorial, I liked that LitElement just showed me the basics, without anything too advanced like tic tac toe. I still felt like an idiot reading both pages, but we fully embrace that and move on.

From what I can tell, it seems like you need React to develop web components. React utilizes virtualDOM. The virtual DOM (VDOM) is a programming concept where an ideal, or “virtual”, representation of a UI is kept in memory and synced with the “real” DOM by a library such as ReactDOM. This process is called reconciliation." check that out here The virtual DOM eliminates the need to manually update the DOM when you are building something. Also, the virtualDOM is not the shadowDOM. The shadowDOM is not the shadow realm from Yu-Gi-Oh! React says that, "The Shadow DOM is a browser technology designed primarily for scoping variables and CSS in web components. The virtual DOM is a concept implemented by libraries in JavaScript on top of browser APIs." I would say React is good for building and LitElement is good for designing. LitElement, which is a part of Polymer, which is a Javascript library, is being used for resigning Youtube, Google, and Google Earth. Pretty much anything Google owns has elements of Polymer in it, so check your DNA.

Another difference is that React has a framework, while LitElement has a library. I am a little confused by this. If you go on React's website they have a huge banner that has "Javascript library" in it. This website says React is a library not a Framework. However, Jermel on quora.com (who has 15+ years of software development) says that evidence points to it clearly being a framework. Thankfully, I couldn't find any disputes that LitElement was a library. Frameworks and libraries are both reusable code that you can use. They can help you solve problems, and it looks like they can keep your code cleaner and more organized.

There are some differences between a framework and a library. ~~One has books that no one reads.~~ A library looks like its much more fluid. You have more choices. A framework is much more ridged and doesn't allow for as much user control. There is a term called "inversion of control" You are in charge of how the application flows with a library, but the framework is in control of the flow. Check out more of this here. There is a good analogy that a library is building your own house at Ikea, you pick everything. A framework is like a contractor and blue prints building your house, much less control.

Obviously, the level of control you have is going to be important to what you can do. It is a good idea to know if a library or framework will better suit your project.

I found a speed test online, which shows LitElement was 30% faster than React. I read the article and did not fully understand what and how they were testing, but hey 30% is a decent margin of victory, congrats LitElement.

If you would like to watch me talk about this click <-there

Intro to the Duction

donoberry — Mon, 25 Jan 2021 06:07:36 +0000

Hello Internet. I am currently studying Security and Risk Analysis in college. I am fascinated with all types of security and security/crime events around the world. I am have always been interested in security events and I would like to try to explain them in simple terms to people. I enjoy all types of security, from digital and cyber, to crime and terrorism. That is my goal with my platform, to try to explain things so everyday people can easily understand them. I plan to talk about some technology things as well.

Some of my favorite classes I have taken have been centered around terrorism and crime, not because I like terrorism and crime. I disavow all criminals. I do enjoy learning about them and what makes them tick, again I don't support them. Anytime there is a crime event, I always read up on it and try to understand it from all sides, again I don't want be a criminal or condone their actions. This is an anti-crime blog.

This video I made explains the latest terrorist attack in Baghdad, which was a double suicide bombing. I don't condone the beefturds who did this, by the way.
https://youtu.be/CLKIMJb45VY