Oh, I just know that would raise some hackles. “Good enough” sounds like one is lowering the bar. If I want to be just good enough dev, then I’m ok with bugs, sloppy code, side-effects, untested code. But what is the next level up from good-enough? Better enough? Hardly. Not if you care about spoken and written language. Best? Who is best? Perfect? Riiiight. You keep telling yourself that, tiger. Perfectionism is not our friend, nor are those who think they are perfect. So let us be happy calling what is not perfect “good enough”. Ok? Are you with me?
If you’re too code-y dev-y, then think about epsilon and any approximation algorithms. I have been watching MIT’s Open CourseWare (if only I could stop calling it Online CourseWare or writing MITOCD), specifically 6.0001 Introduction to Computer Science and Programming in Python with Dr. Ana Bell. While going over the approximate solution for finding a cube root, I re-encountered epsilon (ε, or error. To find a cube root of a number that isn’t a perfect cube, I have to be ok with getting close enough. Good enough, not perfect. See? Ok. Good enough seems less lazy now, doesn’t it? Sure. You were ready to label me lazy until I mentioned “algorithms” and “epsilon”. The larger my epsilon, the less accurate my answer will be, but it is still epsilon.
I’m never going to be perfect. I will never finish a project if I worry so much about perfection. But I can be good enough with an epsilon of 0.1. And the next iteration of that project, theme, or tutorial assignment could be good enough with ε = 0.01. More learning and practice and repetition and repetition and repetition will lead to ε = 0.0001. But I will never be perfect. And that’s ok.
What I want to say here this morning is that “the devil” is the spirit of fear that drives us into rigidity and anxiety, which saps our good will and clouds our compassion. The spirit of Love is where our allegiance lies as good people, spiritual people, people who want to make the world better place. Love is always in dialogue with fear in our souls and bodies and minds. So when perfectionism is sharpening its claws in you, take some deep breaths, stop comparing your insides to other people’s outsides, remind yourself to be a good enough witch, and wonder — what would this whole situation be like if I had more love.
This week’s CodePen Challenge: details and her little bestie summary. I had no idea they existed, so chalk another one up to benefits of a challenge.
Confession time: I did not research too much about how to style the accordion function or even if I could. I did not find any need to with what I had chosen. Not this time. When I use details in a project, I’ll probably wonder more about the styling. When the week is up, I’ll peek at other people’s attempts.
I chose coffee types after looking at coffee graphics. I love posters that show how to make different espresso drinks. The theme announced itself. I had no choice in the matter. I’d like to style the cups more—maybe add a handle—and see if I could animate filling, but probably not for all of the drinks. Maybe the classic three: espresso, cappuccino, latte. Perhaps make an end-of-month challenge combo as a pure CSS entry.
We’ll see. Katy has big-idea-eyes and tiny-time-stomachs.
Here I am so far. (I am using screenshots because my version is not responsive.)
In terms of what is left to do that is furniture or furnishings, I have the lamp and interior of the pod. I can do those and stay pretty true to the original; however, when it’s time to do the cats …
What do I do? Do I make CSS cats that are not much like the original? There are limits with CSS. Do I make them in SVGs? I think if I do that, it feels too much like plagiarising. SVSs are a last resort. Or maybe just put a cat in the back and a person on the bench? Change it enough? I have no idea. Thankfully, I still have that lamp to do. I might animate that.
This is my first CodePen challenge, and the topic is using the del and ins tags.
My applied creativity level was low for this one. I have never used del and ins and had to figure out what their default styles were and how I could alter them. The examples found on CodePen are fanbloodytastic. I’d like to play more with del and ins and include animations like this one by Mark Praschan or make the strike-outs more organic like the school essay example by Halida Astatin (also has great animations). These were just a few. I had to back off the CodePenChallenge rabbit warren to stay focused.
This challenge didn’t excite me as much as others I have seen; however, since I did not know about del and ins, I found value in it. Learning can’t always be snazzy. Now that I have explored the other submissions, I could snazzy up my edits.
I don’t think subjects and verbs should agree all of the time. I mean, what if they’ve grown apart? What maybe verb doesn’t always want to go along with what subject says because it’s always about subject, subject is all, like, totally “It’s all about me”, which is interesting because “me” is an object. It can’t even talk about itself because “itself” is reflective (unlike the ever selfish subject).
Since verb does all of the action, maybe verb should come first and subject can just bloody well agree with it. Maybe you need to think about your desperate need to have everything ok in front of the neighbours. Yeah. Didn’t think about that, did you?
I think programming is less a language than it is a grammar. Imagine writing consoule.log in one region and console.log in another. I know if someone is midwestern, a Texan, or from the Pacific northwest by how they refer to carbonated sugar beverages.
I like to think that somewhere someone would write “council.log” and in a pull request on GitHub, another would write only *console like people do when they see a their/they’re/there error.
Since it had been a while since finishing the pure CSS challenge, remembering what I learned was tough. I use Text Expander for Pug and Sass for-loops. That helped. I was hoping to use the for loops for the dots and buttons, but some needed specific help. I could loop through all 9 dots or just the odd ones, but eventually I had to pick and choose which dots appeared to satisfy the look.
There’s no functionality here. Nothing to add or subtract. I would love create a calculator with this as a design, but I’d use SVGs for the bugs. I thought it would also be fun if instead of their twitching, they’d skittle off in all directions on hover, but with the various levels and z-indices, it made for a lot of decapitation.
I am not disappointed in learning those limitations. It’s learning. I love making a purty thang, but I love even more that I learned something while doing it. So. What is next? I am thinking mid-century gravel art.