${VARIABLE:-value} expands to the contents of $VARIABLE, if it exists, or to "value" otherwise. In this case value is ":", a bash builtin that does nothing. Effectively, the above sets PROMPT_COMMAND to run the autojump command, then to run the pre-existing PROMPT_COMMAND, if any, or a no-op.
3: We obviously dropped the ball on Windows QA. On the Mac, the Downloads window is cmd-shift-j, so I figured it was similar on Windows. Ideally we should make the keyboard shortcut configurable, but could you suggest a good unused Windows shortcut for the meantime?
Ctrl+Alt+p seems open. Same with ctrl+alt+d. You could use 'p' in Pinboard mode and 'd' in Delicious mode. If only one, I'd default to 'p' - feels easier (to me) to press.
At least, I think that's what the "Something smells rotten" error is supposed to mean.
I just registered for Delicious to try this out, as apparently my old account didn't survive the acquisition, so I know my username and password are valid.
That is indeed the "auth failed" error. Only two things I can think of: either you toggled the service slider to "Pinboard" without noticing, or Delicious authentication was down briefly. There was at least one other report of that:
I am. I've verified username, password, and have tried both the Pinboard and Delicious options, and now I'm getting the "Oof! Delicious rejected that username/password" error.
Logged out of delicious, logged back in to verify the credentials. Restarted the browser and tried again -- same error.
On the upside, it's easily one of the best login screens I've seen, and the error animation is quite nice. :-)
Yep, the API documentation is gone; http://delicious.com/help/tools claims that developer documentation is coming soon. In the meantime, Pinboard's API almost exactly matches Delicious's, and its documentation is still up: http://pinboard.in/api.
Incidentally, the Delicious API is still working correctly (albeit slowly) for me.
Yeah, this is common. Otherwise this moviefone rep gets grief for not even talking to the author. Now the moviefone rep can say, I talked to her and she's not making the edits.
What a classic strawman response. TechCrunch says Moviefone "asked us to change our post". Movefone responds "We never told TechCrunch to change the post in any way". But Moviefone very obviously did "ask", which was the original accusation.
No kidding. It started out okay but descended into "it was them not us", followed by "we need to keep the studios happy". Some serious talking out of both sides of your mouth.
I dunno. I read the tech crunch piece, and felt like Moviefone/AOL were in the wrong. Now that I've read Moviefone's response, the whole thing seems overblown.
They didn't threaten them with respect to future access. They didn't demand anything. They weren't rude or antagonizing. They just asked for a change. To me, it now seems like they did exactly what they ought to given how they probably felt.
were you expecting the moviefone/AOL email to say "CHANGE THE FUCKING ARTICLE"
off course they are subtle about it, it is so they can deny it later - but the recipient and the sender (and people reading it now) all know wtf is going on and what was being asked
On the one hand, you're right (and I appreciate the response rather than the downvote!).
On the other hand...
I'm an amateur writer (I admit, this is far from a journalist). Sometimes I'm just wrong, or I write something that ends up coming across differently than I expected. I always welcome feedback, even if I disagree with it, or I think it might be driven by some bias. It doesn't mean that I'm going to change it. But without such feedback, I'm not sure I'd ever get better. I guess I'm worried that in your world, journalist would be living in an ivory tower.
This constantly happens. People submit editorials with their opinion about what others wrote. People write-in to journalist all the time - to agree or disagree.
A movie review isn't an objective piece of pure journalism. It's much more of a subjective editorial, and as such, should be open to far more feedback.
"We never told..." "We would never force..." Much stronger language than Tsotsis used, most of whose post didn't even talk about Moviefone. Protesting too much.
Also, I'd love to know how the presence on staff of someone whose job it is to relay concerns from PR agents to journalists from a separate publication "is just one means we have of ensuring editorial integrity on Moviefone".
Yeah, that's a pretty awful defence. Passing it along and especially asking for a response is, if not tacit endorsement of the message ("Let me know if you're able to take another look at it and make any edits."), certainly implied pressure on the reviewer.
The ethical thing to do would be to say, with slightly nicer words, "sorry, we don't interfere with TechCrunch, we didn't publish the review, go tell them yourselves."
It seems not to work with existing labels whose names contain a slash, even if you rename those labels. Also note that the parent label must exist, e.g. to have "people/friend-a" and "people/friend-b" appear in a hierarchy, you must also have a "people" label.
Command-T is a relatively new Vim plugin that does fuzzy matching on the entire path, giving greater weight to characters immediately following slashes or other word separators in the pathname. I've been using it for a few days now and can attest that it is extremely fast and seems to "know" exactly which file I want after just a few keystrokes.
While this is a beautiful interface, I often read things like "traversing a long source file trying to look for a specific method’s implementation" or "sick and tired of having to scroll through a raw copy of jQuery..." and am confused. Why don't more people use their text editors' search functionality to find a specific piece of code? I never find myself scrolling through long source files.
The problem is, with jQuery specifically, not all functions are declared in the conventional fashion. E.g. trying to find the "height()" method is quite hard with a simple IDE search tool -- look how its defined: http://gist.github.com/291542
It's easy when they're declared as "function name(){}" or "name: function(){}" (in an object) .. or even "name=function(){}" ... but beyond that, it's simply not worth using your IDE's find tool.
