I think this dynamics shows up with masto as well. When the response on the other service does not tag the community, it doesn’t arrive here.

Just trying not so confuse realistic testing with self-deception :) Not convinced testing with synthetic data can pretend to be similar to a production environment.

It is not realistic to replicate a production setup in development when you’re working with sensitive user data. I’ve worked in different contexts (law enforcement, healthcare, financial services) where we’ve had complicated setups (in one instance including a thing called pre-staging environment), but never would a sizeable team of developers have access to user data, and thus to a realistic setup in terms of size, let alone of quality of data.

I’m sorry, but doesn’t sound very convincing. The strongest (reiterated) argument is “venv is standard”, but so is docker.

Heh, when it rains, it’s certainly capitalism’s fault. This ways one doesn’t have to solve individual problems, just dream of abstract revolutions

I guess the answer at this point in time is: it allows you to define the function replacements that matter to you in pnk.lang. But if so, ksh is not a first choice for maintainable code.

So it boils down to: can it “transpile” (transpret rather) its own code?

Even looking into the readme and pink.lang, I’m still unsure what this does. I can imagine, but one single example would be nice. Bonus points if it is actually something useful

On the readme in GitHub it appears that “any” excludes MySQL and SQLite as destinations, and this among the dozen or so DBMS they care to list

Let’s say that for millions of years a healthy biosphere grew around forests and the balance worked. Now you come to tell us it doesn’t. Wouldn’t you think it’s a bit unconvincing?

I wonder why forestation is not present in this chart, as it is a low-cost carbon capture with side benefits. Sure, it is hard to scale, but reducing current deforestation rates would be a big step.

Why would the logs be emitting CO2 (rotting?) if they are alive and growing?

To me it depends on the base image. Some don’t have curl, but have wget. I would go with the flow instead of installing it myself. Especially if I can get away with not having to add more layers for an image of my own and/or using the same command for all containers

Ok, that was stupid. Doing healthcheck with wget, does what wget does: it downloads the result. I had to add --spider to stop doing that

  wget -nv --spider http://localhost:8000 || exit 1

Well, I do need OpenAPI (Swagger). What I don’t need is the generation of thousands of equal static files. Out of all these generated files, index.html would’ve been enough and I don’t need index.html.1, etc.

https://github.com/pgp/XFiles is what I’ve been using and am pretty happy about it

In both XML and JSON you have lists and embedding hierarchichies (I use this term to abstract away from dictionaries/maps which are not exactly represented in XML). These allow for browsing/iterating and filtering when after a particular node.

One difference is that nodes in XML are named (tags). Another thing that you have in XML and not in JSON is attributes. A good example of their use is querying by tag name, node id or class attributes in HTML (which is a loose example of XML). To do the equivalent in JSON, you need to work with keys and values which are less structured and (arguably as consequence) often missing such meta-data. HTML is a popular example, but pretty much any XML has ids and other meta tags and attributes. JSON standards typically don’t and it’s a long separate topic whether this is due to the characteristics of the format itself.

PS: another big difference is that XML also allows for comments, which allows to also encode intent, not only content.

Actually XPATH is arguably more flexible than JSON. There’s also jsonpath, but I don’t think I’ve seen it meaningfully used