今日已更新 386 条资讯 | 累计 20358 条内容
关于我们

标签:#Web

找到 1678 篇相关文章

AI 资讯

Ship a 'Go Live' button: OBS in, LL-HLS out, webhooks in between

TL;DR We're adding live streaming to a SaaS dashboard: a backend endpoint that creates a stream, OBS as the broadcaster over RTMPS, LL-HLS playback with hls.js, and a webhook handler that keeps the UI honest. Working "go live" flow in an afternoon. 📦 Code: github.com/USER/repo (replace before publishing) Webinars, coaching sessions, company town halls: sooner or later your product gets the "can users go live?" ticket. The hard parts (ingest servers, transcoding, CDN delivery) are exactly the parts you should not build. We'll use FastPix as the managed layer here; the same flow works nearly line-for-line on Mux, Cloudflare Stream, or api.video. What we're building: A backend endpoint that creates a live stream and returns a stream key An OBS setup broadcasters can follow in two minutes A viewer page playing LL-HLS with hls.js A webhook handler that flips the webinar between scheduled → live → ended 1. Create the stream server-side 🛠️ You need API credentials (Access Token ID + Secret Key). FastPix uses Basic auth on the server API. Node 20.x, plain fetch , no SDK required (though official Node.js/Python/Go/Ruby/PHP/Java/C# SDKs exist if you prefer). // server/routes/streams.js import { Router } from " express " ; const router = Router (); const AUTH = " Basic " + Buffer . from ( ` ${ process . env . FP_TOKEN_ID } : ${ process . env . FP_SECRET } ` ). toString ( " base64 " ); router . post ( " /webinars/:id/stream " , async ( req , res ) => { const r = await fetch ( " https://api.fastpix.io/v1/live/streams " , { method : " POST " , headers : { " Content-Type " : " application/json " , Authorization : AUTH }, body : JSON . stringify ({ playbackSettings : { accessPolicy : " public " }, }), }); if ( ! r . ok ) return res . status ( 502 ). json ({ error : " stream create failed " }); const stream = await r . json (); // persist against your webinar row: // streamId, streamKey (SECRET!), playbackId await db . webinar . update ( req . params . id , { streamId : stream . str

2026-07-08 原文 →
AI 资讯

I Retired My "85% Knowledge Panel Probability" Claim. Then Google Built the Entity Anyway.

Nine months ago I wrote a post on here claiming my ENS identity architecture had reached "85% Knowledge Panel trigger probability." Two things happened since. Google's Knowledge Graph actually minted an entity node for me. And I learned that the 85% number was fiction — mine. This is the honest retrospective. The timeline, with receipts Date What happened Aug 2025 ookyet.com first indexed Oct 2025 Entity markup shipped: Person @graph , Dentity verification, ENS identifiers. The "85%" post Jun 2026 Search Console turned red: Q&A errors, Profile page: Invalid object type . Cleanup Jun 28, 2026 Fixed markup deployed. Then: hands off Jul 2, 2026 Knowledge Graph Search API returns a machine-minted Person node for ookyet Jul 7, 2026 Search Console fully green: ProfilePage valid, indexed pages up, zero 404s Still no Knowledge Panel. Keep reading — that part matters. What Google actually built You can reproduce this: curl "https://kgsearch.googleapis.com/v1/entities:search?query=ookyet&limit=10&key=YOUR_API_KEY" { "result" : { "@id" : "kg:/g/11z806my44" , "name" : "Qifeng Huang" , "@type" : [ "Person" ] } } Three details in that tiny response taught me more than anything I shipped in 2025. The /g/ MID is machine-minted. You can't register one, buy one, or submit one. Google's entity reconciliation creates it when enough independent sources agree that a person exists. This is the mechanical prerequisite for a Knowledge Panel — the entity has to exist in the graph before anything can be displayed about it. The node's name is my real name, not my handle. My site declares name: "ookyet" . The node says "Qifeng Huang" — pulled from the high-authority anchors (LinkedIn, ORCID), not from my self-declaration. Third-party corroboration outweighs anything you say about yourself. Expected, and honestly a relief: the graph is working as designed. The Knowledge Graph holds 8 distinct people named Qifeng Huang. Query any of them by real name and you get a crowded namespace. Query ookyet

2026-07-08 原文 →
AI 资讯

I added nested CSV to JSON support to a free browser-based converter

I built JSON Utility Kit as a small browser-based toolkit for everyday JSON tasks. The CSV to JSON converter recently got an update for nested JSON structures. For example, headers like user.name, user.email, order.id can be converted into nested objects instead of flat keys. What it supports: CSV to JSON conversion Nested object output from dot notation headers Browser-side processing No signup JSON formatting and validation tools nearby Tool: https://jsonutilitykit.com/tools/csv-to-json/ GitHub: https://github.com/kejie1/json_utility_kit

2026-07-08 原文 →
AI 资讯

The Turborepo + Bun + Biome stack behind a 40-package monorepo

Forty packages, one maintainer, and no ESLint config anywhere in the repo. That is not a boast - it is the direct result of a decision made early: every tool in the toolchain has to earn its place by governing all forty packages from one config file, not forty. The repo is flare-engine , a modular 2D engine for React Native + Web (animation, gamification, interactive UI, with games as showcases - not a game engine, not a Unity or Godot competitor). The stack behind it is Turborepo Bun Biome , and this post is the actual setup: the real turbo.json , the real biome.json , the real CI guardrail, straight from the repo (trimmed only where a config is long, and I say so where I trim), not a starter template's idealized version. Four binaries, four root configs - turbo.json , biome.json , tsconfig.base.json , and the Changesets config - each governing all forty packages at once (Bun's own "config" is just the workspaces array in the root package.json ). Plus a CI step that fails the build the moment a package imports something it shouldn't. That is the whole story, and I want to show you the files, not describe them. Four binaries, not twelve config files The thesis is narrow: a solo maintainer can keep forty packages honest only if there is exactly one config of each kind, and every package extends it rather than declaring its own variant. Twelve packages each with a slightly different ESLint config is not a monorepo, it is twelve monorepos wearing a workspace file as a costume. Here is the root package.json that runs all of it - Bun workspaces (not pnpm; that distinction matters and I will say it again below), the script table every package leans on, and the pinned package manager: // C:\_PROG\flare-engine-workspace\flare-engine\package.json { "name" : "flare-engine" , "version" : "0.0.0" , "private" : true , "workspaces" : [ "packages/*" , "benchmarks" , "apps/*" ], "scripts" : { "build" : "turbo build" , "test" : "turbo test" , "lint" : "turbo lint" , "typecheck" : "t

2026-07-08 原文 →
AI 资讯

You don't own your reading list. You rent it.

Here is an uncomfortable one: you do not own your reading list. You rent it. Every "follow" button you have pressed in the last decade put your reading relationship inside a company's database, where it can be ranked, throttled, or ended the day the business model changes. You did not sign anything. You just stopped owning it. It was not always like this. Feeds were the quiet machinery that kept the web interoperable. RSS and Atom meant a site, a reader, and a robot could all agree on the same stream without asking anyone's permission. You published once, and anything could read it: whatever app, whatever order, no algorithm in the middle. Then it eroded. Plenty of sites ship no feed at all now, and "follow us" quietly became "create an account on someone else's platform." The reason is not mysterious. Platforms had every incentive to close the loop, because a feed lets you leave, and an account does not. So the industry swapped "here is my stream, read it however you like" for "log in to see updates," and a generation of sites simply stopped publishing feeds, because the platform was where the audience was. That is the trade you made without noticing. The open format that asked nothing of you got replaced by a login that asks for everything. Your reading list used to live in your reader and survive a company changing its mind, its ranking, or its whole business. Now it lives in their database and survives exactly as long as they allow. Getting it back is not nostalgia. It is infrastructure for independence: tooling that treats feeds as a first-class citizen, aggregates the sources you actually choose, and keeps that stream under your control instead of a platform's. The full case for why this is worth fixing, and what feed-first tooling looks like, is here: https://mederic.me/blog/open-web-feeds So, honestly: how many of the people and sites you follow could you still read tomorrow if the platform in the middle disappeared tonight?

2026-07-08 原文 →
AI 资讯

Building an AI Side Project That Actually Ships — Lessons from Shipping 3 MVPs

I've lost count of how many AI side projects I started and abandoned. The pattern was always the same: a spark of excitement, two weeks of frantic coding, then the slow fade into yet another half-finished repo collecting dust on GitHub. But something changed in the last two months. I shipped three AI-powered MVPs to real users. Not all of them made money, but every single one taught me something about what it actually takes to go from "cool idea" to "working product." Here's what I learned. The brutal truth about AI side projects When I started my first real AI project back in February, I had grand ambitions. I was going to build a content summarizer that would pull articles from any URL, analyze sentiment, and generate Twitter threads. I spent three weeks obsessing over the perfect prompt engineering, containerizing the whole stack with Docker, and setting up a complex pipeline using LangChain and Pinecone. Then I showed it to a friend. "Can I just paste a link?" she asked. I had built an entire orchestration layer, but the input field was buried behind two authentication screens. The project died that weekend. Here's the thing I keep rediscovering: AI side projects fail not because the technology doesn't work, but because we over-engineer before we have users. The three MVPs that actually shipped After that failure, I changed my approach. I decided to ship something—anything—every two weeks. No matter how ugly. No matter how incomplete. The goal was to have a URL someone could visit and use. MVP #1: A dead-simple blog title generator I built this in a single afternoon. The entire frontend was a text box and a button. Backend? A single Node.js endpoint that called OpenAI's API with a prompt like: "Generate 5 catchy blog titles about [topic]." Here's the code that powered it (I've simplified it, but this is the gist): import express from ' express ' ; import OpenAI from ' openai ' ; const app = express (); const openai = new OpenAI ({ apiKey : process . env . OPENAI

2026-07-08 原文 →
AI 资讯

Agentic AI: Good Upfront Design Pays You Back Later

I spend a lot of time preaching architecture and constraints, so it is always nice when a side project gives me receipts. Adding this new feature to DumbQuestion.ai was a good reminder that a well-structured first version lets you spend your next iteration on value, not repair. Below, you will find a few relatively simple challenges and how thoughtful, upfront design made the changes effortless. To vibe or not to vibe ... Many developers jump right in and just rip out an app, ship fast, let the coding agent sort it out, come back and deal with it later. To be fair, that absolutely can get you to first release faster. But even on a solo project, a little proper SDLC discipline pays back later when you want to extend the product without turning every feature into a rescue mission, which is a theme that already runs through how I have been building DumbQuestion.ai. Extend this to the enterprise and you turn a little upfront effort into potential huge savings on token spend Roasting starup pitches (for sport) ... The core idea for Startup Roast was simple enough: take a startup pitch, roast it, and add a reality-check section so the output is not just mockery for mockery’s sake. To illustrate (and avoid just vaguely describing the feature) I picked a random but highly upvoted pitch from Product Hunt: Vida . Vida, which pitches itself as an “AI clone” that learns how you work, remembers what matters, and becomes a “second you,” with early use cases like Reply Rescue, Prompt Rescue, Resume Rescue, Workspace Cleanup, and Daily Wrap. This is a pretty common target use case of agentic AI making it a solid candidate. If you want to skip ahead, here's an example roast for Vida. Combining a preliminary web "market search" into the content yielded a result that was not just sarcastic, but informed. The roast hit the obvious AI-clone positioning, questioned whether the product was really a clone versus a macro suite, and then turned the market context into a sharper Reality Check

2026-07-08 原文 →
AI 资讯

Aesecnryption demo site

I rebuilt aesencryption.net so text AES (128/192/256) runs fully in the browser - the key and plaintext never leave the page. The hard part is staying byte-compatible with common server-side AES libraries (mode, IV, padding, base64 output), so I ship copy-paste equivalents in PHP, Java, Python, Go, Rust, Kotlin and JS. Live tool (mine, free): https://aesencryption.net - feedback on the crypto choices welcome. My own site.

2026-07-08 原文 →
开发者

The New HTTP QUERY Method

If you've ever built a search endpoint, you've hit this wall. Your query has filters, sort orders, a nested set of facets, maybe a geo bounding box. It doesn't fit in a URL, and cramming it into query string params is ugly and fragile. So you reach for POST /search , send the whole thing as a JSON body, and quietly accept that you've just lied about what the request does. It's not creating anything. It's a read. But POST is the only tool that lets you attach a body without fighting the platform. That gap finally got filled. In June 2026 the IETF published RFC 10008 , which defines the HTTP QUERY method: a new verb built for exactly this case. The two bad options Every read that needs structured input has been stuck choosing between GET and POST, and both are wrong in their own way. GET is the semantically correct choice. It's safe (the client isn't asking to change anything), it's idempotent (retrying it is fine), and it's cacheable. The problem is the body. RFC 9110 is explicit that content in a GET request has no defined semantics , and sending one may cause some implementations to reject the request. So your query has to live in the URI, where you run into unknown length limits across proxies and servers, encoding overhead, and the query landing in access logs and browser history. POST solves the body problem and creates a new one. It carries any payload you want, but it's neither safe nor idempotent by definition. Intermediaries won't cache it, clients won't retry it automatically after a dropped connection, and anything inspecting traffic has to assume the request might have side effects. You get the body, you lose everything that made the request honest. QUERY is the missing third option: a method that carries a body and keeps the semantics of a read. What QUERY actually is The spec, authored by Julian Reschke, James Snell , and Mike Bishop, describes it in one sentence: A QUERY requests that the request target process the enclosed content in a safe and idempo

2026-07-08 原文 →
AI 资讯

What We Learned Rewriting an Interactive Map Editor: Fabric.js, CORS, and 20,000 Lines of Legacy TypeScript

A story about how migrating an interactive office map editor turned into an engineering investigation involving Fabric.js, tainted canvas , and an architecture that's finally easy to extend. In most software projects, one sentence usually makes every developer nervous: "Let's rewrite this module from scratch." It often means months of development, regression risks, and endless architecture discussions. Our project was no different. We develop, a workspace management platform that allows companies to manage office spaces and book desks. One of its core features is an interactive office map editor, where administrators upload floor plans, place desks and meeting rooms, and publish maps for employees. Over the years, this editor slowly evolved into a real monolith. And the problem wasn't simply the number of lines of code. Where It All Started The editor dated back to the AngularJS era. The main component had gradually grown into a single file responsible for almost everything: loading maps working with Fabric.js CRUD operations keyboard shortcuts dialogs saving event handling The main editor component alone contained nearly 2,270 lines of code . Behind it lived another codebase — the map engine itself. Almost 20,000 lines of TypeScript spread across more than 230 files. One of the biggest architectural issues was an infinite rendering loop. fabric . util . requestAnimFrame (() => this . tick ()); Even when the user wasn't interacting with the editor, rendering continued forever. It worked. But every new feature became more expensive to build. Why We Decided to Rewrite It The motivation wasn't AngularJS itself. The real reason was business requirements. The product needed completely new capabilities: map drafts safe publishing high-quality printing multiple workspace modes easier support for new object types Every new feature pushed harder against the existing architecture. Eventually it became obvious: We weren't fighting individual bugs anymore. We were fighting the

2026-07-08 原文 →
AI 资讯

One-Command Deployment: Self-Host Your AI Wallet with GHCR

One-Command Deployment: Self-Host Your AI Wallet with Docker and GHCR Would you trust a third party with your AI agent's private keys? If that question makes you uncomfortable, you're already thinking about self-hosting your wallet infrastructure — and WAIaaS makes it genuinely practical with a single Docker command. This post walks through how to get a fully self-hosted Wallet-as-a-Service running on your own server, with your own keys, under your own rules. Why Self-Hosting Your AI Wallet Actually Matters The rise of autonomous AI agents changes the stakes around custody. When a human manages a wallet, they can pause, verify, and think before signing. An AI agent operates continuously, potentially making hundreds of transactions — so the infrastructure holding those keys becomes critically important. Hosted wallet services make a trade-off: you get convenience in exchange for trusting someone else's server, someone else's rate limits, and someone else's uptime SLA. For many teams building experimental agents, that's fine. But for anyone running production workloads, handling real funds, or operating in environments with strict data residency requirements, the calculus shifts. Self-hosting gives you: Full key custody — private keys never leave your infrastructure No rate limits imposed by a third party — your server, your throughput Auditability — WAIaaS is open-source, so you can read every line of code handling your keys Network control — bind to localhost, put it behind a VPN, restrict egress however you want WAIaaS is built specifically for this use case: a self-hosted, open-source Wallet-as-a-Service designed for AI agents, deployable in one command. The One-Command Start The Docker image is published to GitHub Container Registry (GHCR) at ghcr.io/minhoyoo-iotrust/waiaas:latest . The fastest path to a running instance is: git clone https://github.com/minhoyoo-iotrust/WAIaaS.git cd WAIaaS docker compose up -d That's it. The daemon starts on port 3100 , bound to

2026-07-07 原文 →
AI 资讯

How do you balance speed and security in CI/CD?

Modern software development thrives on rapid iteration. Organizations deploy new features, bug fixes, and infrastructure updates multiple times each day to remain competitive and respond quickly to customer needs. Continuous Integration and Continuous Delivery (CI/CD) have transformed software delivery by automating repetitive tasks and accelerating release cycles. However, speed without security creates significant risk. A fast deployment pipeline that introduces vulnerable code into production can expose organizations to data breaches, service disruptions, and compliance violations. Conversely, excessive manual security reviews can slow innovation and delay valuable releases. The solution lies in integrating security directly into the CI/CD pipeline rather than treating it as a separate checkpoint. This philosophy, commonly known as DevSecOps, enables organizations to deliver software rapidly while maintaining a strong security posture. Understanding CI/CD Pipelines What Is Continuous Integration? Continuous Integration (CI) is the practice of frequently merging code changes into a shared repository. Every commit automatically triggers builds and tests, allowing development teams to identify integration issues early instead of waiting until the end of a project. Frequent integration encourages collaboration, reduces merge conflicts, and improves overall software quality. What Is Continuous Delivery? Continuous Delivery extends Continuous Integration by ensuring that validated code is always in a deployable state. Automated testing, packaging, and release preparation make it possible to deploy new versions with minimal manual effort whenever the business is ready. What Is Continuous Deployment? Continuous Deployment goes one step further by automatically releasing approved changes to production once they pass all quality and security checks. This approach significantly shortens release cycles while requiring a high level of confidence in pipeline automation. Benefi

2026-07-07 原文 →
AI 资讯

Signal Forms vs. Reactive Forms: When Should You Upgrade Your Forms? (Angular 22 Guide)

TL;DR — Angular 22 promoted Signal Forms from experimental to stable. This is not "Reactive Forms are dead." It's a real architectural trade-off, and this post walks through both APIs in full, with production-realistic code, so you can decide feature-by-feature instead of framework-war-by-framework-war. Table of Contents Why This Matters Now The Core Question Reactive Forms: Why It Became the Standard Full Example: Reactive Forms Login Where Reactive Forms Still Excel Signal Forms: What Actually Changed in Angular 22 Full Example: Signal Forms Login Where Signal Forms Shine Side-by-Side: Core Concepts Mapped Deep Dive: Validation Synchronous Validation Cross-Field Validation Conditional Validation with when() Async Validation Deep Dive: Dynamic and Nested Forms Nested Form Groups Dynamic Collections (FormArray-style) Deep Dive: Form State — Dirty, Touched, Errors, Submission Developer Experience and Testing Performance Considerations Interop: Migrating Without a Big-Bang Rewrite Migration Strategy for Enterprise Teams When NOT to Migrate Decision Framework FAQ Closing Thoughts Why This Matters Now With Angular 22 (released June 3, 2026), Signal Forms left experimental status and became part of the stable, supported API — alongside resource() and httpResource() . That's a meaningful milestone: it means the Angular team ran extensive internal case studies across real form-heavy applications at Google before committing to stability, and the interop story with Reactive Forms has matured enough that a big-bang rewrite is no longer the only migration path. At the same time, Angular 22 also flips two important defaults: components now use OnPush change detection by default, and zoneless change detection continues its push toward becoming the standard. Signal Forms is part of that same story — Angular's reactivity model finally speaking one dialect end-to-end, from component state to form state to async data. None of this makes Reactive Forms obsolete. It changes what "the

2026-07-07 原文 →
AI 资讯

No createStore, No combineReducers, No Provider — Setting Up State in 3 Lines

Redux setup is a ceremony. You create a store, compose your reducers into a root tree, wrap your app in a Provider, register middleware, and configure enhancers — all before you write a single line of feature logic. SDuX Vault™ replaces that entire ceremony with two function calls and zero root configuration. Redux Store Ceremony A typical Redux application requires several files and configuration steps before state management is operational. Here is what a minimal Redux setup looks like for a single feature: // store.ts import { createStore , combineReducers , applyMiddleware } from ' redux ' ; import thunk from ' redux-thunk ' ; import { userReducer } from ' ./reducers/userReducer ' ; const rootReducer = combineReducers ({ users : userReducer , }); export const store = createStore ( rootReducer , applyMiddleware ( thunk ) ); // App.tsx — Provider wrapper required import { Provider } from ' react-redux ' ; import { store } from ' ./store ' ; function App () { return ( < Provider store = { store } > < UserList /> < /Provider > ); } That is 20+ lines of configuration across multiple files — and it only covers one feature. Add a second feature and you are back in the combineReducers file, composing another slice into the tree. Add middleware and you are threading enhancers through applyMiddleware . Add DevTools and you are composing composeWithDevTools on top. Every new feature touches the root configuration. Redux Requirement What It Does createStore() Creates the single global store instance combineReducers() Composes feature reducers into a root tree applyMiddleware() Registers middleware (thunk, saga, etc.) Provider Makes the store available to all components via context composeWithDevTools() Enables Redux DevTools integration ⚠️ Warning: Every entry in that table is root-level configuration. Adding a new feature means editing the root reducer composition, possibly the middleware stack, and potentially the Provider hierarchy. Root configuration is a shared depende

2026-07-07 原文 →
开发者

Building a SaaS solo, as a Graphic designer

I came into this as a graphic designer, not a software engineer. I didn't have a computer science background, and a lot of what BrandStack needed — authentication, databases, payments, deployment — was new territory for me when I started. What made it possible wasn't some shortcut. It was breaking the problem down into pieces I could actually learn: how user accounts work, how a database should be structured so one person's data never leaks into another's, how to move from test payments to real ones without breaking checkout for actual customers. I made real mistakes along the way. Early on, every user shared the same underlying brand data because I hadn't scoped the database correctly to each account — a serious bug that I only caught by testing with two separate accounts myself. Finding and fixing that taught me more about proper application architecture than any tutorial could have. I don't think being a designer first is a disadvantage for building product. If anything, it means the interface and the experience get real attention, not just the backend logic. But it does mean being honest about what you don't know yet, and being willing to slow down and actually understand a problem instead of copying a fix you don't understand. BrandStack is still a work in progress. But it's a real, working product — built by someone who had to learn most of this from scratch, in public, one bug at a time.

2026-07-07 原文 →
开发者

How to Monitor Website Changes Automatically (Visual Diff Tutorial)

How to Monitor Website Changes Automatically I run a few websites and need to know immediately when something breaks. A CSS regression, a broken layout, a missing section. Manual checking doesn't scale, and text-based monitoring misses visual issues. The {{screenshot-diff}} on Apify takes two screenshots and produces a pixel-level comparison with an overlay showing exactly what changed. How It Works Take a baseline screenshot of the correct state. Then take a current screenshot of the live page. The actor compares pixel by pixel and returns a diff image with changed pixels highlighted, plus a percentage telling you how much changed. import requests , time API_TOKEN = " YOUR_APIFY_TOKEN " def capture_screenshot ( url ): resp = requests . post ( " https://api.apify.com/v2/acts/weeknds~website-screenshot-api/runs " , headers = { " Authorization " : f " Bearer { API_TOKEN } " }, json = { " url " : url , " fullPage " : True } ) run_id = resp . json ()[ " data " ][ " id " ] time . sleep ( 15 ) items = requests . get ( f " https://api.apify.com/v2/acts/weeknds~website-screenshot-api/runs/ { run_id } /dataset/items " , headers = { " Authorization " : f " Bearer { API_TOKEN } " } ). json () return items [ 0 ][ " screenshotUrl " ] def compare_screenshots ( baseline_url , current_url ): resp = requests . post ( " https://api.apify.com/v2/acts/weeknds~screenshot-comparison-tool/runs " , headers = { " Authorization " : f " Bearer { API_TOKEN } " }, json = { " baselineImageUrl " : baseline_url , " currentImageUrl " : current_url , " threshold " : 0.01 } ) run_id = resp . json ()[ " data " ][ " id " ] time . sleep ( 10 ) items = requests . get ( f " https://api.apify.com/v2/acts/weeknds~screenshot-comparison-tool/runs/ { run_id } /dataset/items " , headers = { " Authorization " : f " Bearer { API_TOKEN } " } ). json () return items [ 0 ] baseline = capture_screenshot ( " https://mysite.com " ) current = capture_screenshot ( " https://mysite.com " ) result = compare_screenshots ( b

2026-07-07 原文 →