Well, I’d argue that Shrek’s normal face is exactly halfway between Buddha and Sexy Human Shrek.

That’s actually saying a lot. When you step into shit and that shit is the best part of your shoe, you don’t have a good shoe.

I MISSED HOW MANY UPDATES??

Persona 5 is great and already mixes up the formula in many ways (gun). But many players just don’t care for RPGs regardless.

I think Expedition 33 showed that this is not the case. Guns are a minor change to combat in Persona 5, it felt almost the same as P3R. They should play around with bigger changes.

Yes, there exist different kinds of type safety. What the fuck are you even asking?

Sure, never claimed anything different. Runtime type safety != type safety.

There are plenty of libraries to provide type safety at runtime.

Yes it is? It isn’t strictly sound, but it is type-safe aside from explicit escape hatches (which other type-safe languages also provide).

Wait, why would wind and water be rare on other planets? Finding good places to do water-based renewables is probably gonna be difficult on most planets, but shouldn’t most planets with atmospheres have wind?

That is not a good enough reason to justify its existence.

There is no better reason to justify the existence of any technology than it having objective advantages, even if there are drawbacks as well!

You can very well say that fossil fuel companies should continue to exist because look at how long it’s been around with all the expertise people have. Surely they should stay around, right?

You’re pretending that I’m making a completely different argument. Don’t do that. I never mentioned “how long it’s been around with all the expertise people have”. There are literal objective advantages. Why are you pretending they don’t exist?

Please also see my other comment

So people should choose a model that decreases development speed & increases complexity as well as the potential for bugs/side effects, just because “it’s the right way to go”. People have been trying to embrace the cascade for a long, long, long time, and it keeps causing issues in larger applications that simply don’t happen with non-cascading approaches.

Why do you pretend like these aren’t real advantages?

See, that’s a great example of a critique that nobody with professional experience would make.

There is a natural tendency to try reinvent something when you don’t understand it enough to be comfortable with it. Then that new thing lacks the maturity and scrutiny that the old thing went through to survive the test of time.

While this is something that does happen, there’s also a tendency for people in the industry to dismiss new things without actually looking into the pros and cons.

Doesn’t it give you pause that many very experienced Frontend & CSS developers see objective advantages in Tailwinds utility class approach? Of course there are also objective disadvantages, don’t get me wrong. But that means that these tools should be used whenever their advantages can shine and their disadvantages don’t cause issues.

Any developer that can’t clearly name the issues with regular CSS that Tailwind attempts to solve either hasn’t been developing long enough to encounter these issues, or hasn’t actually tried to understand what Tailwind is.

That’s what Tailwind looks like to people who think they know CSS.

Lots of software has non-reproducible build artifacts due to e.g. timestamps being inserted, or due to non-stable algorithms being used during compilation. They presumably managed to remove all sources of randomness from the image they build.

You just unlocked a core direwolf20 memory

The g in gobject stands for “Go run away as fast as you can and you may survive”

Other jobs being more stressful doesn’t make their jobs less stressful. Let’s not make anyone’s job more stressful than necessary :)

Also don’t fuck with people who strongly resemble your daughter

I don’t think there’s a single valid point in that comment

This one? https://gitlab.gnome.org/chergert/ptyxis

Seems really cool, thanks for the tip!