Quick request, if it's doable: would you mind making a portable version of this? We're super locked down on our machines (even as developers), and all programs that need to be installed need to be approved. Portable programs fly under the radar, so they're easier to try discreetly, then we can make an official request to get them approved or buy a license.

Edit: oh my, you also made Insomnia, that I used when Postman was on the enshittification path...

Recently released, Moonring and Balatro are both written in Lua, and I think both with LÖVE.

Is the UK still considered "European"?

By the rest of Europe? Kinda.

They always seem to have imagined themselves to sit halfway across the Atlantic instead of a few miles off the French coast.

Only geographically. For many other attributes, accelerating away at speed.

AI image generation wasn't good enough in early 2022 to generate game assets. Yeah you could probably generate pokemon-like looking stuff, but it wouldn't be usable as-is in a game.

Edit: and even today. Generate textures for blocky assets? Sure. But full pokémon models that wouldn't need a ton of rework? Nope.

> But full pokémon models that wouldn't need a ton of rework? Nope.

Well, that is the core benefit of using AI - you can save a lot of the groundwork, especially in concept art. Making 20, 30 versions of "fat rat in yellow with lightning bolt symbols in their fur" is cheap with AI, but prohibitively expensive if you're using humans. You're starting running already.

It's implied that GPT-4 has so many restrictions that will not argue and just do what is asked. In the context of the joke, an unfiltered LLM will just debate you.

I've been writing TypeScript for at least 6 years now, and I couldn't go back to JavaScript. I understand the arguments of those who don't like it, but ultimately they all boil down to either "writing types is tedious" or "I know better than the compiler".

> I spend more time trying to resolve TypeScript complaints than I do adding code

Those complaints from the compiler are the main feature of any statically typed language! In TypeScript, they're here to tell you that something is potentially wrong with your code, and it might break in runtime.

"I spend more time trying to resolve [typing errors] than I do adding code" is something you'll hear from anyone that is not used to statically typed languages. _Any_ language, not just TypeScript. And it's an issue that quickly goes away by itself once you learn the language.

> Our team has lost hours on TypeScript exceptions in staging and production builds (but oddly not offline/local) where some external type was missing or incompatible, another one being that the local environment passes linting but CI doesn't, it shouldn't be so hard

That one is probably a simple configuration issue, not TypeScript's fault.

> Having to rewrite correctly and infallible JavaScript so that it was friendly enough for TypeScript to understand

This one I can get behind, but I'd put it in the same bag as the first point. I'm sometimes tempted to use things like non-null assertions (like in the example with the .filter().map()) but I'd say that 99.9% of the time the compiler is right, and it's safer to right one more line than a `!`. But you don't do it to make TypeScript happy, you do it to rule out a potential edge case, and avoid a runtime crash.

I hear you, but I think the author has a point. I also want to spend more time on coding than trying to resolve TypeScript complaints.

> (mind putting a publish date on these articles?)

Off-topic, but please PLEASE put the publish date on your (technical) articles. When I'm looking for documentation and open an article without a publish date, I almost always discard it immediately. I'm not going to risk wasting my time learning outdated knowledge.

This article does have a publish date, it's just easy to miss in the top right corner with a bit of a low contrast ratio (in dark mode at least)

The article is from 2022-03-08

I find the bevy-ecs 0.10 already cleaned a lot of cruft and improved DX.

Better to break it entirely than to show the blackout, I guess.

"they have that right because it's in their TOS" == "they have that right because they so"

Well, yes, it's their platform. No one forces anyone to use it, if they don't like the terms they can go elsewhere.