This is not a problem with the nutrition of foods, it is the metric that is poorly designed. One more argument against the chart
On the Fediverse also as @mapto@qoto.org
Можете да намерите и като @mapto@masto.bg
Abito in Italia @mapto@feddit.it
This is not a problem with the nutrition of foods, it is the metric that is poorly designed. One more argument against the chart
Your seem to insist to twist this towards vegan wars, but this is you. It’s not the graphics, it’s not me.
Upfront analysis and design is very close to independent from the technology, particularly at the I/O level
What’s wrong with reducing density through absorption (of water)?
To me it seems that your interpretation completely disregards the Y-axis. On the other hand, I wouldn’t think the colour coding does a good job in separating along the carnivorous-vegetarian-vegan scale.
Q: what do we do? A: profile and decompose. Should not be that distant as a thought
So much wrong about this chart. It is factually correct, but it answers the wrong question.
This chart makes it way too easy to optimise for cheap protein, which is misleading. It is not this what it takes to have a healthy organism. It takes a varied diet, with balanced quantities of liquids (see milk), vitamins (see sprouts), fatty acids (see salmon), minerals (see shrimps, eggs, walnuts), actually carbs (potatoes, rice, spaghetti), and much more…
Definitely my preference. However, for someone just starting (and not used to pressing TAB or calling help() ), an empty prompt might be intimidating.
That’s why I typically suggest interactive tutorials, e.g. any of these two: https://www.learnpython.org/en/Hello%2C_World! https://futurecoder.io/course/#IntroducingTheShell
If you do that, nothing will actually be checked. You need to explicitly run
pyright
in CI.
Are you suggesting that you prefer to do the type validation upon execution? I’d like to have the checks done beforehand, be it in the IDE during coding or in CI. This way the feedback loop is shorter.
Then, backwards compatibility is a big thing in python, unlike node. So when typehints were introduced in 3.5 with PEP 484, they had to be optional.
At least Typescript defines the semantics of its type hints. Python only defines the syntax! You can have multiple type checkers that conflict with each other!
It is a bit more complicated than that. Here’s a quote the above-mentioned PEP (3.5 was back in 2015, we’re at 3.12 now and typehints have evolved):
Note that this PEP still explicitly does NOT prevent other uses of annotations, nor does it require (or forbid) any particular processing of annotations, even when they conform to this specification. It simply enables better coordination, as PEP 333 did for web frameworks.
Have you looked at this one? https://pypi.org/project/onboot/
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?
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.
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.
I guess you misunderstood my providing illustrative examples in parentheses. Replace or remove the examples, the argument is still valid.
In another subthread they’ve pointed out that processing food also changes its protein density, most obviously by water transfer.