Taplink.at Reviews

1. Julio Ballardo

   · Sales at Dangelo Co. · over 3 years ago
   Switched from Linktree and never looked back

   I've been Using Linktree for a few years now and while I needed a simple list of all my links, it did fine. But when I decided to build something more complex, I realized that I need another tool. So I chose Taplink.

   You can very much create a micro website using Taplink to suit all of your needs. Text, links, photos, forms, payments, and much more may all be added. In contrast, the only thing you can do with link tree and the other "competitors" is add links and maybe social media icons. Competitors are referred to in quotation marks because Taplink is in a different league from the others.

   But to top it all off, the support is fantastic. Every time I used the live chat, I received a response within 24 hours. I also provided them with a much-needed feature, and within 24 hours, I received an email letting me know that they had included it. The Taplink crew deserves praise. You're doing a really great job out here!!

   👍 Pros:    Great customer support|Easy to use|Simple yet powerful and efficient tool|Cheap price|Excellent features|Well designed

   👎 Cons:    Less popular
2. Sean

   · Data Center Engineer at Digital Ocean · over 3 years ago
   Great Tool

   It's affordable and powerful. I use it as a lending page and cannot be happier!

   🏁 Competitors: Linktree

   👍 Pros:    Easy to use|Landing page builder|Simple but powerful
3. Benjamin

   · Manager at Lianna Marketing · over 3 years ago
   Love it!

   A great website builder. It's easy to customize and has lots of business features too. The price is also nice.

   Highly recommend!

   👍 Pros:    Faster and cheaper than others|Variety of designs|Excellent features|Mobile-friendly

   👎 Cons:    Seems complicated/complex at first

Cppcheck Reviews

Taplink.at mentions (0)

Cppcheck mentions (10)

• Configuring Cppcheck, Cpplint, and JSON Lint

  I dedicated Sunday morning to going over the documentation of the linters we use in the project. The goal was to understand all options and use them in the best way for our project. Seeing their manuals side by side was nice because even very similar things are solved differently. Cppcheck is the most configurable and best documented; JSON Lint lies at the other end. - Source: dev.to / over 2 years ago

• Enforcing Memory Safety?

  Using infer, someone else exploited null-dereference checks to introduce simple affine types in C++. Cppcheck also checks for null-dereferences. Unfortunately, that approach means that borrow-counting references have a larger sizeof than non-borrow counting references, so optimizing the count away potentially changes the semantics of a program which introduces a whole new way of writing subtly wrong code. Source: about 3 years ago

• Static Code analysis

  For my own projects, I used cppcheck. You can check out that tool to get a feel. Depending on what industry your in, you might need to follow a standard like Misra. Source: over 3 years ago

• How do you not shoot yourself in the foot ?

  Https://cppcheck.sourceforge.io/ (there are many other static analysis tools, I just haven't used them or didn't care for them). Source: over 3 years ago

• Linting tool for prohibiting the use of specific std types

  Sounds like something that could simply be communicated with the team that writes the tests. Unless you have dozens of such classes. In that case, you could just use e.g. Cppcheck and add a rule (regular expression) that searches for usages of the forbidden classes. Source: over 3 years ago