The best engineering teams take control of their tools. They help develop the frameworks and libraries they depend on, and they do this by running production code on edge — the unreleased next version. That's where progress is made, that's where participation matters most. This sounds scary at first. Edge? Isn't that just another word for danger? What if there's a bug?! Yes, what if? Do you think bugs either just magically appear or disappear? No, they're put there by programmers and removed by the very same. If you want bug-free frameworks and libraries, you have to work for it, but if you do, the reward for your responsibility is increased engineering excellence. Take Rails 8.1, as an example. We just released the first beta version at Rails World, but Shopify, GitHub, 37signals, and a handful of other frontier teams have already been running this code in production for almost a year. Of course, there were bugs along the way, but good automated testing and diligent programmers caught virtually all of them before they went to production. It didn't always used to be this way. Once upon a time, I felt like I had one of the only teams running Rails on edge in production. But now two of the most important web apps in the world are doing the same! At an incredible scale and criticality. This has allowed both of them, and the few others with the same frontier ambition, to foster a truly elite engineering culture. One that isn't just a consumer of open source software, but a real-time co-creator. This is a step function in competence and prowess for any team. It's also an incredible motivation boost. When your programmers are able to directly influence the tools they're working with, they're far more likely to do so, and thus they go deeper, learn more, and create connections to experts in the same situation elsewhere. But this requires being able to immediately use the improvements or bug fixes they help devise. It doesn't work if you sit around waiting patiently for the next release before you dare dive in. Far more companies could do this. Far more companies should do this. Whether it's with Ruby, Rails, Omarchy, or whatever you're using, your team could level up by getting more involved, taking responsibility for finding issues on edge, and reaping the reward of excellence in the process. So what are you waiting on?

Here on a summer night in the grass and lilac smell Drunk on the crickets and the starry sky, Oh what fine stories we could tell With this moonlight to tell them by. A summer night, and you, and paradise, So lovely and so filled with grace, Above your head, the universe has hung its … Continue reading Dreams of Late Summer →

The first in a series of posts about doing things the right way

A deep dive into the Action Cache, the CAS, and the security issues that arise from using Bazel with a remote cache but without remote execution

(I present to you my stream of consciousness on the topic of casing as it applies to the web platform.) I’m reading about the new command and commandfor attributes — which I’m super excited about, declarative behavior invocation in HTML? YES PLEASE!! — and one thing that strikes me is the casing in these APIs. For example, the command attribute has a variety of values in HTML which correspond to APIs in JavaScript. The show-popover attribute value maps to .showPopover() in JavaScript. hide-popover maps to .hidePopover(), etc. So what we have is: lowercase in attribute names e.g. commandfor="..." kebab-case in attribute values e.g. show-popover camelCase for JS counterparts e.g. showPopover() After thinking about this a little more, I remember that HTML attributes names are case insensitive, so the browser will normalize them to lowercase during parsing. Given that, I suppose you could write commandFor="..." but it’s effectively the same. Ok, lowercase attribute names in HTML makes sense. The related popover attributes follow the same convention: popovertarget popovertargetaction And there are many other attribute names in HTML that are lowercase, e.g.: maxlength novalidate contenteditable autocomplete formenctype So that all makes sense. But wait, there are some attribute names with hyphens in them, like aria-label="..." and data-value="...". So why isn’t it command-for="..."? Well, upon further reflection, I suppose those attributes were named that way for extensibility’s sake: they are essentially wildcard attributes that represent a family of attributes that are all under the same namespace: aria-* and data-*. But wait, isn’t that an argument for doing popover-target and popover-target-action? Or command and command-for? But wait (I keep saying that) there are kebab-case attribute names in HTML — like http-equiv on the <meta> tag, or accept-charset on the form tag — but those seem more like legacy exceptions. It seems like the only answer here is: there is no rule. Naming is driven by convention and decisions are made on a case-by-case basis. But if I had to summarize, it would probably be that the default casing for new APIs tends to follow the rules I outlined at the start (and what’s reflected in the new command APIs): lowercase for HTML attributes names kebab-case for HTML attribute values camelCase for JS counterparts Let’s not even get into SVG attribute names We need one of those “bless this mess” signs that we can hang over the World Wide Web. Email · Mastodon · Bluesky