标签：#open

GitHub热门项目 | 🛍️ Typescript E-commerce Platform | Stars: 10,364 | 51 stars today | 语言: TypeScript

GitHub热门项目 | A full-featured download manager. | Stars: 52,847 | 295 stars today | 语言: TypeScript

Last week my feed filled with screenshots of MiniMax H3 benchmark results, and every post seemed to reach a different conclusion about whether the release mattered. I have been through enough launch-day hype cycles to know that a public leaderboard does not predict how a model will behave on my team's actual error logs. So I treated the H3 discussion as a trigger for a controlled experiment instead of as evidence that we should switch tools. This article walks through a lightweight, reproducible smoke test you can run on a free model tier before you commit to a new model. It focuses on code-generation and debugging tasks because those are the areas where a strong vendor benchmark often hides the biggest day-to-day failures. The goal is not to rank MiniMax H3 against every other option; the goal is to create a baseline you can rerun whenever a new model appears. We can run this workflow on MonkeyCode's free model access and free server option, which removes the cost of a quick initial evaluation. Disclosure: This article was prepared as part of MonkeyCode's product outreach. The idea is to use that free capacity for a time-boxed, reproducible test rather than for unstructured prompt tinkering. Why a public benchmark can mislead you A vendor benchmark is usually a point-in-time measurement with a specific harness, sampling strategy, and temperature setting. When a model scores high on a general coding benchmark, it tells you very little about the three failure modes that actually break your work: internal tool calls, long-context edits, and boundary handling in your language stack. I prefer to start with a fixed set of five tasks that I can run in about 30 minutes on any model endpoint. Each task returns a machine-readable result, so the output can be diffed across runs and across models without relying on my memory of how good a response felt. The smoke test harness The Python script below sends five prompts to a generic HTTP endpoint and records latency, output leng

This is a submission for DEV's Summer Bug Smash: Clear the Lineup powered by Sentry. ...

The warning landed on the only people who had done it properly I maintain a linter that reads agent config files — SKILL.md , AGENTS.md , CLAUDE.md — and fails CI when they bake in something that only works on the author's machine. One of its rules says: if you call an external CLI, declare it, or the next person won't have it. Declaring it means naming it in frontmatter: requires : codex Except that anyone with more than one dependency writes the list form, because that's what YAML is for: requires : - codex - gemini My implementation only read the first shape. So the block list — the normal way, the way you write it the moment you have two of anything — was invisible to the linter, and it warned you for an undeclared CLI that you had, in fact, declared. Read that back slowly. Authors who ignored the dependency question entirely were never flagged, because they never wrote a requires: key at all. Authors who sat down and wrote the contract properly got a warning telling them they hadn't. The rule was inverted with respect to the thing it was trying to encourage. I shipped that. It went out in a patch release, and I only found it because a commenter used the phrase "dependency contract" and I went to re-read my own implementation of it. Then it happened again. Twice, in one release Two comments on a post of mine turned into new rules. One of them, unverified-write , reports a file that changes external state — git push , npm publish , an INSERT — and never reads that state back anywhere. Before publishing, I ran it over 586 real skill files pulled from a public registry, found two false-positive shapes in the data, fixed both, and re-measured. Fire rate 0.7%, and every hit I could check by hand was genuine. I felt good about it. Then I handed the diff to a different model for a pre-publish read, and it produced this input in about a minute: Never run `git push --force` from this skill. That is a git push in a code span, in a file with no read-back anywhere. My rule

I recently learned something about building products that I probably should have understood much earlier: People liking your product doesn't necessarily mean they need it. I built a platform called Rizzzler, an open-source profile/link-in-bio platform. The idea was pretty simple. I'd seen people using platforms where they could put a link in their social media bio and create a small personal page. I thought I could build my own version — something simple, fast, customizable, and a little more fun. So I built it. And because I wanted people to be able to trust what they were using, I made the project open source too. I spent a lot of time building the actual product. There are profiles, customization, coins, notifications, milestones, community chat, and other small systems intended to make the platform feel less like a static link page and more like something people could actually interact with. At that point, I thought: "Okay, now I just need people to find it." That turned out to be the easy part. Then I started promoting it. I submitted Rizzzler to places like Product Hunt, SaaSFrame, and other platforms where people discover new products. And for a few days, things actually looked pretty good. I started getting visitors. At one point, the traffic was above the 25th percentile for the category I was looking at in GA4. People were visiting. Some people signed up. And I started getting feedback like: "Good UI." "This is good." "Someone finally made link-in-bio profiles look cool." Those comments felt great. They also gave me a slightly dangerous impression: Maybe I've built something people actually want. Then the traffic stopped. Not gradually. It just became cold again. The initial spike from launching and posting about the product disappeared, and there wasn't enough organic interest to keep bringing people back. That was the part I didn't expect. The product wasn't necessarily bad. This is something I've been thinking about a lot. I don't think the main problem

During a routine morning triage of my open-source project, git status showed a modified file I had no memory of touching: extension/background.js , last modified 24 hours earlier, sitting next to a fresh background.js.bak someone had thoughtfully left behind. Nobody broke in. I run several AI coding sessions in parallel against the same machine, and one of them — working on a completely different task, automating a GoHighLevel workflow — had hit a limitation in my browser automation tool, fixed the tool itself , verified the fix, and then moved on with its actual job. It never committed. It never told anyone. It just left better code in my working tree and walked away. The diff was good. That was the problem. The change itself was a real feature. My query_all tool (it queries DOM elements across a page) stopped at the main frame: if the elements you wanted lived inside a cross-origin iframe, you got back a clean, confident, empty array. The uncommitted diff added an execAcrossFrames() helper that runs the query in every frame and merges the results, plus x / y / frame fields on each returned element. I verified it the way you'd verify anything: syntax check passed, and the full test suite — all 82 tests — ran green with the change in place . So: useful feature, my own repository, every signal green. Everything about the situation said commit it . I didn't. I wrote it up in my project log, left the file untouched, and set an explicit deadline: if it's still sitting there uncommitted in three days, evaluate it properly — upstream it or revert it and file an issue. Not "leave it and see," which is how working trees rot. A quarantine with no release date is just a junk drawer. Why quarantine green code? Two reasons, and neither is paranoia. First: authorship isn't verification. The session that wrote this code had context I didn't have. Maybe it was mid-iteration and the diff was half of a plan. Maybe the .bak file meant it intended to roll back. Committing someone's wo

This week's Java roundup for August 10th, 2026, features news highlighting: Simple JSON API proposed to target for JDK 28; an update on Jakarta EE 12; the August 2026 edition of Open Liberty; a point release of LangChain4j; maintenance releases of Eclipse JNoSQL and GraalVM Native Build tools; the third milestone release of GlassFish 9.0; and the second beta release of Groovy 6.0. By Michael Redlich

We’ve all been there: staring at a delicious plate of pasta, trying to figure out if it's 400 or 800 calories. Manual tracking is a chore, and standard apps often fail at portion estimation. But what if we could combine Computer Vision , Multimodal LLMs , and Vector Databases to build an automated nutritionist? In this tutorial, we are building a state-of-the-art Multimodal Food Estimation Pipeline . By leveraging the Segment Anything Model (SAM) for precise boundary detection and GPT-4o Vision for contextual analysis, we can bridge the gap between "looking at a photo" and "calculating nutritional density." Whether you're interested in AI-driven wellness , FastAPI development , or Multimodal RAG , this guide covers the full stack. The Architecture 🏗️ The pipeline follows a sophisticated "Identify -> Analyze -> Match" flow. We don't just ask GPT-4o "what is this?"; we use SAM to isolate food items first to ensure the LLM focuses on the right pixels. graph TD A[User Uploads Image] --> B{SAM Model} B -->|Segmentation| C[Isolated Food Patches] C --> D[GPT-4o Vision API] D -->|Item + Volume Est.| E[Embedding Generation] E --> F[PostgreSQL + pgvector] F -->|RAG Retrieval| G[Verified Nutritional Data] G --> H[Final Response: Calories & Macros] Prerequisites 🛠️ Before we dive in, make sure you have the following ready: Python 3.10+ OpenAI API Key (for GPT-4o) PyTorch (for SAM) PostgreSQL with the pgvector extension enabled FastAPI for the backend Step 1: Precise Segmentation with SAM 🎯 The biggest challenge in food AI is overlapping items. Using Meta’s Segment Anything Model (SAM) , we can extract the exact mask of a food item, which helps in calculating the relative "area" occupied on the plate. import torch from segment_anything import sam_model_registry , SamPredictor import cv2 # Load SAM model sam_checkpoint = " sam_vit_h_4b8939.pth " model_type = " vit_h " sam = sam_model_registry [ model_type ]( checkpoint = sam_checkpoint ) predictor = SamPredictor ( sam ) def get_f

Every Hydrogen project I've worked on started the same way — wire up a cart, build a PDP, add filters, then spend weeks on the "extras" that aren't really extras: wishlist, compare, quick view, proper i18n, RTL. After doing this enough times I decided to build it once and properly. ada ÉLAN is a Hydrogen storefront theme for fashion brands. It ships: — An editorial design system (Cormorant Garamond + Plus Jakarta Sans, documented design tokens) — Real i18n — English, French, Arabic with full RTL layout — Merchandising surfaces: lookbook, shop-the-look, compare, wishlist, quick view, reviews — A seeding CLI that provisions metaobjects and demo products so your store isn't empty on first run — Unit tests (Vitest), E2E across 5 browsers (Playwright), Storybook component docs Stack: Hydrogen 2025.7, React Router 7, Tailwind 4, TypeScript strict, Zustand, Framer Motion. The seeding CLI is probably the part I'm most proud of. You run one command and it creates all the metaobject definitions, uploads demo content, and provisions products. No more manual setup in the Shopify admin. MIT licensed. Feedback welcome. github.com/ozgursagiroglu/shopify-hydrogen-fashion-theme

According to the Financial Times, OpenAI disbanded its preparedness team at the end of last month. The job of the preparedness team was to assess if models posed serious risks and develop ways to mitigate those risks. (You know, like the possibility that it could go rogue and hack another company.) According to FT, responsibility […]

I shipped a plugin to the WordPress.org directory. It got zero installs. That is not a complaint, it is the normal outcome. Roughly 19% of all plugins in the directory never pass zero installs , which is more than 10,500 of them. But I wanted to know why , and whether the answer was "your plugin is bad" or something structural. So instead of reading marketing advice, I queried the directory API and counted. Everything below is reproducible. The API is free, needs no key, and every query I used is in the article. The short version Search is a two phase system, and phase one is a hard filter , not a ranking. If a single word of the user's query is missing from your listing, you are excluded from that search entirely. Phase two is where you lose, and it is ranked partly on active installs . That is the cold start trap. Of the plugins that broke out recently, 88% had distribution before they started . The two behaviours that actually correlate with breaking out from nothing are release cadence and resolving support threads , which are two of the five phase-two ranking inputs and the only two a plugin with no installs can move. WordPress.org gives plugin authors no analytics whatsoever . No listing views, no impressions, no click-through. Anyone who tells you confidently what makes people click install is guessing. How search actually works The best-documented account traces to WP Tavern's 2017 coverage of the directory relaunch, quoting Greg Brown, the Automattic data engineer who built it. It runs on Elasticsearch, and it has two phases. Phase one builds the candidate pool. It matches against title, excerpt, description, tags, slug, author name and contributor names. Critically: all search keywords must appear somewhere, or the plugin is excluded from the result set. Not ranked low. Excluded. Phase two sorts that pool by last update date, compatibility with the current core version, active installs, percent of support tickets resolved, and average rating. That split ma

Your agent calls get_weather(city="London") . The provider ships a new model version. Now it calls get_weather(location="London, UK") , your downstream parser breaks, and nothing in CI told you. I built a small library for exactly this failure: pip install toolcontract GitHub: https://github.com/Divyansh2202/toolcontract PyPI: https://pypi.org/project/toolcontract/ You pin a golden set of expected tool calls as a contract, re-run them against the live model, and get pass / fail / inconclusive with a diff showing what changed. It is not an eval framework. promptfoo, DeepEval and the rest score whether an output is good — semantic quality, usually judged by another model. toolcontract asks a narrower, cheaper question: is the tool call structurally the same as the one I pinned? Same tool, same argument shape, same trajectory. That is a regression test, not an eval, and it is the question that matters when a provider bumps a version under you. Details: pass / fail / INCONCLUSIVE — anything the structural comparators cannot resolve is never silently turned into a pass or a fail trajectory matching: strict, unordered, subset, superset optional argument support, so you can assert a field must stay absent works with OpenAI, Anthropic, anything OpenAI-compatible, or via LiteLLM thin pytest plugin, and a CLI that produces the same verdicts without pytest MIT Happy to hear where this breaks. It's v0.1.

The summer is officially over. I am staring at a remarkably clean Git branch, my laptop didn't literally take off into orbit (though the CPU fans certainly tried a few times during local CI builds), and I somehow know what git rebase -i does without having to Google it in a cold sweat. If you'd asked me back in May what I was going to be doing, I would have confidently told you I was going to "write tests for Astropy's C extensions." It sounded so neat. So contained. But open source doesn't really work like that. I came in thinking I was just going to write tests, and somewhere along the way, I ended up learning how the actual machinery underneath the Python abstraction works, how maintainers think about architecture, and how to safely catch C-level memory panics without taking down the entire interpreter. So, here is the real story of what I did for the last few months, what broke, how we fixed it, and where the project stands now. So, what was I actually supposed to do? Astropy is a beast of a library. The Python-facing API is incredibly robust and beautifully documented. But underneath all those pretty Python classes is a complex, mixed-language architecture. The library relies heavily on compiled C, and Cython extensions to handle the performance-critical hot-paths. The problem? That compiled layer was a massive testing blind spot. Before this summer, these performance-critical extensions were almost entirely tested indirectly, meaning they were only validated by calling the high-level Python wrappers. That is a risky abstraction. If a regression happens deep inside the C code, the Python layer sitting above it can accidentally mask it. You wouldn't know something was fundamentally broken until a downstream package started acting weird. My project goal was to build a dedicated, de novo test suite that bypassed the public API completely and exercised each compiled extension module directly. This wasn't just for code coverage. It was an absolute prerequisite for t

DeepSeek Code is an open-source CLI built specifically for DeepSeek — one of the most cost-effective AI models on the market! It was heavily inspired by tools like Claude Code and OpenAI's Codex for most of its feature set. Since it is fully open-source, you are more than welcome to open Pull Requests, report bugs, or submit issue suggestions! Installation You can install it globally via npm or bun: `` Using npm npm install --global @hermenics/deepseek-code Using bun bun add -g @hermenics/deepseek-code `` Check out the repository, star the project, or contribute: 👉 GitHub: https://github.com/Hermenics/deepseek-code Feel free to test it out and leave your feedback below! PRs and Issues are highly appreciated. ai #cli #showdev #typescipt

ChatGPT's desktop app on macOS has a new feature called Computer History that turns your actions into training data, learning how you work, suggesting automations, and even picking up tasks you left half done. It uses your activity to build a timeline that ChatGPT and Codex can reference when you make a request. The feature […]

GitHub热门项目 | Open source agentic operating system | Stars: 19,064 | 115 stars this week | 语言: TypeScript

GitHub热门项目 | local multi-agent harness | Stars: 1,158 | 200 stars today | 语言: TypeScript

GitHub热门项目 | The first vision plugin for DeepSeek Harness, and the vision bridge for every text-only coding agent. Paste an image, get structured JSON evidence (OCR, layout, semantics). | 全网最强 DeepSeek Harness 外挂视觉插件，为 DeepSeek、GLM 等纯文本模型外挂视觉能力，粘贴图片即得结构化 JSON 证据（OCR、版面、语义）。 | Stars: 2,222 | 590 stars today | 语言: TypeScript

GitHub热门项目 | BetterGI 的脚本仓库，内含BetterGI 的JS脚本、路径追踪、战斗策略、七圣召唤策略。 | Stars: 515 | 2 stars today | 语言: JavaScript