Skip to content

Instantly share code, notes, and snippets.

View gavinlaking's full-sized avatar
🤠

Gavin Laking gavinlaking

🤠
View GitHub Profile
<?xml version="1.0"?>
<root>
<item>
<name>Map Function keys to match Apple</name>
<identifier>private.itunes_fkeys</identifier>
<autogen>__KeyToConsumer__ KeyCode::F1, ConsumerKeyCode::BRIGHTNESS_DOWN</autogen>
<autogen>__KeyToConsumer__ KeyCode::F2, ConsumerKeyCode::BRIGHTNESS_UP</autogen>
<autogen>__KeyToKey__ KeyCode::F3, KeyCode::EXPOSE_ALL</autogen>
<autogen>__KeyToKey__ KeyCode::F4, KeyCode::LAUNCHPAD</autogen>
<autogen>__KeyToConsumer__ KeyCode::F5, ConsumerKeyCode::KEYBOARDLIGHT_LOW</autogen>
@gavinlaking
gavinlaking / Tabbed navigation helper
Created June 17, 2010 16:17
This captures paths which are children of the top-level navigation elements, providing you place the routes in the :paths.
def shopkeeper_navigation
contents = ''
links = [
{:label => "Dashboard", :value => shopkeeper_dashboard_path, :paths => []},
{:label => "My Products &amp; Services", :value => shopkeeper_products_path, :paths => [shopkeeper_services_path, shopkeeper_returns_path]},
{:label => "My Customers", :value => shopkeeper_customers_path, :paths => [shopkeeper_promotions]},
{:label => "My Shop", :value => shopkeeper_shop_path, :paths => [shopkeeper_paypal_details_path]},
]
links.each do |link|
if (request.path =~ %r(#{link[:value]}.*)) || (link[:paths].any?{|path| request.path =~ %r(#{path}) })
@gavinlaking
gavinlaking / filesystems.md
Created August 5, 2012 17:30
Filesystem as databases?

If we should store assets on the filesystem rather than in the database because access is faster, then why are we not storing data on the filesystem rather than in a database? A database typically consists of a couple of files, one being the hunk of data itself, the others, supporting files like indicies.

So, why not use the filesystem as it was designed: direct and flexible. Store our data using the right tool for the job; individual files storing discrete pieces of information. I can't think of anything that an off-the-shelf database ACIDically provides that our filesystems can not already do.

Consistency may be lacking, from the respects of ensuring that a file is as it says (size, contents, etc), however, is it not the job of those wishing to store data to ensure it is correct before persistence? i.e garbage in, garbage out.

What are your thoughts?

#!/bin/bash
set -exo pipefail
BUILD_ENV=$1
if [ `uname` == 'Darwin' ]; then
OSX=1
JSCOMPRESSOR="yuicompressor --type js"
else
OSX=
@gavinlaking
gavinlaking / gist:6949417
Last active December 25, 2015 08:49
Benchmarking the #matches method from Gary Bernhardt's 'selecta' (https://github.com/garybernhardt/selecta). Here I offer an 'unfair' (in that I'm asking the method to check through ~235,000 choices) run, but it highlights to me that this method is not as slow as I first thought.
$ ruby tmp.rb
Rehearsal -------------------------------------------------
file read 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 ( 0.003113)
file to array 0.040000 0.010000 0.050000 ( 0.039986)
#matches 0.230000 0.000000 0.230000 ( 0.230347)
---------------------------------------- total: 0.280000sec
user system total real
file read 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 ( 0.001798)
@gavinlaking
gavinlaking / stretches
Created July 3, 2013 20:24
Devise "stretches" benchmarked.
require "bcrypt"
require "benchmark"
password = "My_Rea11y-B1G_S3cr3t"
salt = "2d3ec54c5fa27b9e9d8a3e7f1ed9f7f7c4b1c7e2f7da5c"
stretches = [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 ,8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20]
stretches.each do |cost|
puts "\n\n-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-"
puts "Cost = #{cost}"
@gavinlaking
gavinlaking / 2012-08-05 1815
Created August 5, 2012 17:22
Filesystem as databases?
If we should store assets on the filesystem rather than in the database because access is faster, then why are we not storing data on the filesystem rather than in a database? A database typically consists of a couple of files, one being the hunk of data itself, the others, supporting files like indicies.
So, why not use the filesystem as it was designed: direct and flexible. Store our data using the right tool for the job. I can't think of anything that an off-the-shelf database ACIDically provides that our filesystems can not already do.
Consistency may be lacking, from the respects of ensuring that a file is as it says (size, contents, etc), however, is it not the job of those wishing to store data to ensure it is correct before persistence? i.e garbage in, garbage out.