Gegenfrage: Warst du überall auf der Welt außerhalb Deutschland?

To me in most cases it’s the opposite. I don’t watch video tutorials to solve a specific problem (sorry, Roal Van de Paar!), but to get into something. And therefore I prefer to see the problem solving in between and the workflow for that activity. If it really tends to waste my time, I just skip forward.

I don’t consider that promotion. Think from the perspective of the people who happily use US big corpo social media. When you’re forced to consume B, because A is banned, you’re likely not giving B a fair chance, even if it would have otherwise convinced you.

(Obviously you must still enforce rules and ban the platforms that don’t abide.)

Tarantino loves Italy.

I’d tolerate it, but not support it. Forcefully taking them away gains these platforms even more support and demand. Only when people seek for alternatives or a change on their own, we can solve the problems.

They swap cables and enjoy the music.

I use it as the default shell only in my terminal (with fish completion). You still have to deal with breaking changes and inconsistency. On top of that, you need to wrap a lot of your commonly used commands and tools to take full advantage of it. But personally I consider it worth learning and using. Not only do I hate working with raw text, I also love the visual and interactive data representation. And working with existing tools is honestly not a huge problem. It’s just what you’d usually do regularly. Obviously POSIX-compliant shells in combination with many tools like jq, too are already capable of nushell’s power. But I just like to have it included in the shell language, so I can work with the data more casual.

I couldn’t tell you why you’d use it instead of Powershell. I just never tried Powershell on Linux.

Why should they? Less users are programming anything, but more people have become users of computers in the first place. And we have more users of computers, precisely because the levels of abstraction do not require the ordinary user to program anything. Today’s ordinary user is more “ordinary” than fifty years ago. This development of making a tool or subject more accessible to the layman, by hiding the complexities with abstractions and yet allowing more skilled users to gain advantages by peeling away the abstractions, is present in many different fields throughout the history of mankind.

If you look closely, it is not really surprising. Not even a problem at all. In fact, if you have the simple understanding that maybe somebody doesn’t want to program, not because they are a stupid idiot or a lazy normie consumer, but because they simply don’t give a shit about it, follow other interests and can contribute to the world with other skills, then the observation that most users are not programming anything, is insanely unproblematic.

I’d immediately substitute it for an alternative left nipple that is definitely left (for the next five years at least).

The USA is neither the best country nor the worst country. It’s just one of the countries.

Drova - Forsaken Kin…well, it’s the only 2024 game I played.

Thank you! That’s exactly what I need, but I probably have a unique case where I as the developer am the cause for the feature creep myself. For work, luckily our product is an ERP software, so in most cases I’m naturally uninterested for more features :D

But I do choose this approach for these problems to not have reusable code on purpose xD I’m not try-harding to rewrite everything for every feature separately, so most of it would be separated and modular, as long as it’s required by the initial purpose of the software. However I avoid writing generic and reusable code that only gets rewarded with functional scalability in mind.

And unit testing is honestly not on my list for these kinds of projects. At best I’d write integration tests to challenge the route handlers. But simply using the software is sufficient to cover the predictably unpredictable usage in these cases.

Thanks for the recommendations. A missing understanding of what needs to be reusable could be a problem. E.g. in my example when I add a DAO-like interface just to implement it for the two entities I have, I invite my future self to add unnecessary features to make more use of that interface and other generic components.

This is the kind of extreme solution I want to discover with a fitting search term. But personally, I still want to be able to fix bugs and update dependencies. I don’t want to lock down the project, but only the features.

Yup, but I struggle to find results about intentional usage of anti-patterns. I mean, it’s actually a good thing, but… :/

I use mostly Rust. I meant “extending” in terms of features.

It definitely is and I wouldn’t take this approach mid-way for a project with multiple users and contributors. But it works for my little projects that desperately need me to be the user more than the developer. An example would be a REST API with a few endpoints where the database operations are handled directly in the route handlers uniquely for that specific task.

Yes, the better solution is probably not on the programming layer :D I was still interested in a specific term to this approach to look up to what extent somebody can drive this.

Kenshi 2, but I just want a remastered version that makes it more playable.