Compared with simple clients, modern clients are generally much easier to use and more Ruby-like

I have been doing different things w/ Ruby for a couple of years now and the only bad thing I can say about it is that it makes programming in other languages feel awfully burdensome. = )

Ease of Use Write your model almost as you would on paper and Dynare will take care of the rest!

If components gain the slot attribute, then it would be possible to implement the proposed behavior of <svelte:fragment /> by creating a component that has a default slot with out any wrappers. However, I think it's still a good idea to add <svelte:fragment /> so everyone who encounters this common use case doesn't have to come up with their own slightly different solutions.

I wanted to use GitHub Gists which are a wonderfully low friction way of sharing code

Jbuilder gives you a simple DSL for declaring JSON structures that beats manipulating giant hash structures. This is particularly helpful when the generation process is fraught with conditionals and loops.

# fix a bug in one of your dependencies vim node_modules/some-package/brokenFile.js # run patch-package to create a .patch file npx patch-package some-package

I don't think this is what really matters at the end, since whatever is the implementation the goal should be to provide a library that people actually like to use.

Wondering how to get field state from multiple fields at once? People coming from Redux-Form might be wondering where the equivalent of Redux Form's Fields component is, as a way to get state from several fields at once. The answer is that it's not included in the library because it's so easy to write one recursively composing Field components together.

Looks like the problem is that debounce defaults to waiting for 0 ms ... which is completely useless!

I suppose it all comes down to tooling. It should be easy to author a pattern. A set of implicit (possibly explicit) patterns to author patterns may be useful.

The language should work for developers, not the other way around.

I think this is being rejected on grounds that are too arbitrary, and detract from what to me are the best things about Svelte -- it's fun and easy to use, and lets you write components in a way that's natural and expressive.

The controller informs customers that they havethe possibility to withdraw consent. To do this, they could contact a call centre on business daysbetween 8am and 5pm, free of charge. The controller in this example doesnotcomply with article 7(3)of the GDPR. Withdrawing consent in this case requires a telephone call during business hours, this ismore burdensome than the one mouse-click needed for giving consent through the online ticketvendor, which is open 24/7.

Also,mechanisms for data subjects to withdraw their consent easily must be available and informationabout how to withdraw consent must be provided.

State management is also easier. Instead of importing hooks and using setters, you just define a property within the script tags. You then change the value by re-assigning it (not mutating the original value).

But it’s impossible to argue with the value binding. You don’t have to worry about defining the value property and an onChange event for an input box in Svelte, bind:value does it all

What I think we're lacking is proper tooling, or at least the knowledge of it. I don't know what most people use to write Git commits, but concepts like interactive staging, rebasing, squashing, and fixup commits are very daunting with Git on the CLI, unless you know really well what you're doing. We should do a better job at learning people how to use tools like Git Tower (to give just one example) to rewrite Git history, and to produce nice Git commits.

With a recognisable, ever present icon, user's can easily manage their consent at any time.