Better expressivity. RDF* allows every LPG to be efficiently converted into an RDF model. On the other hand, LPGs cannot fully represent RDF* because of the rich expressivity of the latter.

The rich internal structure of LPGs results in more efficient storage and faster data traversals and queries.

Building a knowledge graph with a property graph database is straightforward compared to the alternatives. Unlike RDF, property graphs were designed as a database model (rather than data exchange format) for applications and analytics.

So fork is fast, unsafe, and maybe bloated.

Avoiding one-off, proprietary builds per partnership and policy, or just as bad, manual processes to reach out to partners for deletes, can save the industry real money and reduce room for error.

Users can start and complete the account linking process in your app, an environment they are already familiar with. Users do not require login credentials because they have already been authenticated on the device and in your mobile app.

The key differences between #inject and #scan_left are: Incremental results: #scan_left returns a series of results after processing each element of the input series. #inject returns a single value, which equals the final result in the series returned by #scan_left. Laziness: #scan_left can preserve the laziness of the input series. As each incremental result is read from the output series, the actual calculation is lazily performed against the input. #inject cannot be a lazy operation in general, as its single result reflects a calculation across every element of the input series.

Easy to scan and understand what’s discussed in the space. Fewer distractions to help you focus on topics you care about. Easy to browse topics because they’re all in one place in the thread navigation panel. Thread replies don’t interrupt the main conversation. You can toggle history on and off.

Tini differentiates with:

Pros & Cons

lifecycle is also managed automatically by Svelte

This doesn't solve the problem of supporting where the users are; not everyone wants to use a rolling release, not everyone has the same kernel version, and so on. Not all distros support deb packages.If everyone was on Arch, then AUR would solve everyone's problem. If everyone was on Fedora, then RPM would solve everyone's problem but we don't have that universal packaging system.Freedom to pick and choose what you want to use on Linux is what makes it fun but for people that are trying to develop software and share it with their customers on linux, it's super complicated; they don't have a way to ship software to everyone in one simple package.Software devs can't just ship a deb package. That eliminates the large number of RPM based users such as Fedora, RedHat Fedora Enterprise, CentOS Stream or other distros. Then you have the Arch users, etc.That's what Flatpack/snap/appimage can help with.

packaging is difficult to maintain on linux with so many different distros that software companies to support.Flatpak, snap, and appimage makes it easier to ship once for a lot of distros that support them.

Upvoted on techical merit; but the correct answer which should be accepted is

daemonless container engine

From my point of view, this approach will help you to write cleaner code. Also, it will help to maintain the project. For instance, moving a file from the current directory to another will cause fewer problems, because every file uses an absolute path instead of a relative one. Last but not least, it helps you during development.

Why is it big news? Because the main advantage of npm over other package managers like yarn or pnpm is that it comes bundled with NodeJS.

That’s not the only way of writing end-to-end tests in Rails. For example, you can use Cypress JS framework and IDE. The only reason stopping me from trying this approach is the lack of multiple sessions support, which is required for testing real-time applications (i.e., those with AnyCable 😉).

One such feature is parameterized tests. This feature enables us to execute a single test method multiple times with different parameters.

And this has some immediate benefits: more efficiency, significantly faster to process, supports indexing (which can be a significant advantage, as we'll see later), simpler schema designs (replacing entity-attribute-value (EAV) tables with jsonb columns, which can be queried, indexed and joined, allowing for performance improvements up until 1000X!)

I personaly prefer the types approach. it assures that if the function is edited, all the queries will return correct results.

When fetch runs on the server, the resulting response will be serialized and inlined into the rendered HTML. This allows the subsequent client-side load to access identical data immediately without an additional network request.

They also let us make assumptions about relative relationships between folders during development.

Monorepos let us version our back-end with our front-end, making compability easy with combined builds and deployments using a shared CI/CD pipeline.

The advantage of this technique over the Synchronizer pattern is that the token does not need to be stored on the server.

Components are the core of MJML. A component is an abstraction of a more complex email-responsive HTML layout. It exposes attributes, enabling you to interact with the final component visual aspect.

Write less code, save time and code more efficiently with MJML’s semantic syntax.

One part of React that I've always championed is how it's just JavaScript. I like that in React you don't use a distinct template syntax and instead embed JavaScript, compared to Svelte's templating language

There’s several benefits to splitting code into multiple packages, whether it be a library, micro-services or micro-frontends.

Also with one history, these packages will always have commits that are in sync or “atomic”.

He says that writing the function yourself makes it easy to modify and to fix bugs or improve efficiency.

For one, anyone using this module would automatically benefit from any future performance improvements without having to do anything themselves.

Knowing what your elements are lets browsers use sensible defaults for how they should look and behave. This means you have less customization work to do and are more likely to get consistent results in different browsers.

All of this semantic labeling helps machines parse your content, which helps users.

You don’t need to do any tricky cursor stuff, because it’s all semantically wired up already.

Using multiple termini has three magnificent, beautiful advantages.

Additionally, you may add debugging steps, error handler or rewire the conditions dynamically without touching the original snippet.

the explicit modelling has one massive advantage: all possible outcomes of the nested activity are visible and have to be connected in the outer diagram

It allows us to reuse steps

allows monads to simplify a wide range of problems

Whatever language or default programming paradigm a developer uses, following the monad pattern brings many of the benefits of purely functional programming.

Not only does it help to structure myself,

Using a terminus to indicate a certain outcome - in turn - allows for much stronger interfaces across nested activities and less guessing! For example, in the new endpoint gem, the not_found terminus is then wired to a special “404 track” that handles the case of “model not found”. The beautiful thing here is: there is no guessing by inspecting ctx[:model] or the like - the not_found end has only one meaning!

Compared to existing Ruby desktop frameworks, such as Shoes, Bowline's strengths are its adherence to MVC and use of HTML/JavaScript.

this method has a great looking dual boot menu that auto-remembers your last used OS, making dual booting convenient

The advantage of the first method is that one easily overrides the complete unit, the default Container Linux unit is not parsed at all anymore.

And this way also fits more with data down, actions up.

So you might ask what is the benefit of using the event dispatcher over just passing a prop down? In some scenarios, you will need to add an action to a button that is 3 or more components down and passing a prop all that way is considered prop drilling (it is frowned upon by some, meh each to their own). However in the case of using an event dispatcher, even though these events don’t bubble, we can easily pass them up using a shortcut that Svelte has.

With this setup, we can create a default action that should take place if one wasn’t passed down.

The upside to snaps is they make installations simpler because they avoid the heartache of dependency hell. This is what occurs when a new application can’t run either because a required resource isn’t available, it’s the wrong version, or its installation overwrites files required by existing applications so they can’t run.

None of what I’ve said is provided out of the box with apt/deb, and they can only be done in ways that are way to much complex for most non-technical users and in some points they require more work, and some things are simply not available with apt/deb, like the possibility to isolate dependencies, app confinement at the level snaps provide, the possibility to use the same package on other distros (including those that don’t have apt/deb) and different versions of the distro (same package will work on old and new versions independently on how it was built…

This example of the chromium really shows that unless snaps or other similar format was used, applications would have to be sometime very heavily patched to work on older versions of systems to the point that it generates so much work that it would not be worth do to it otherwise, or at least not worth when the snap option exists and doesn’t require that much more work.

snaps have many benefits that are huge: automatic updates List item shorter delivery times between develper and user possibility to use tracks and choose how much on the bleeding edge you want to be way more security and privacy, less dependency issues software available on the same versions independently of distributions and versions of distributions

If folks want to get together and create a snap-free remix, you are welcome to do so. Ubuntu thrives on such contribution and leadership by community members. Do be aware that you will be retreading territory that Ubuntu developers trod in 2010-14, and that you will encounter some of the same issues that led them to embrace snap-based solutions. Perhaps your solutions will be different. .debs are not perfect, snaps are not perfect. Each have advantages and disadvantages. Ubuntu tries to use the strengths of both.

The best thing about an open source operating system, such as Linux, is that you can customize it as much as you want, ranging from default applications such as file managers, music players, web browsers, and text editors etc. to more vital system components such as the kernel, display managers, and terminal consoles. You can do this simply by downloading new application software and replacing the old ones with that, or editing system components by making changes in the source code of your operating system. The display manager is one such system component that you can replace simply by running a few commands mentioned in this article.

Also, you'll get more concise code. More boilerplate left handling by the machine means more available human for the actual logic.

People really don't stress enough the importance of enjoying what you're programming. It aids creativity, makes you a better teammate, and makes it significantly easier to enter a state of flow. It should be considered an important factor in choosing a web development framework (or lack thereof). Kudos!

The change is too consequential to be developed in situ.

Patches can be reviewed as part of your normal review process, forks probably can't

Get told in big red letters when the dependency changed and you need to check that your fix is still valid.

Keep your patches colocated with the code that depends on them.

Sometimes forks need extra build steps, e.g. with react-native for Android. Forget that noise.

Because Jamstack projects don’t rely on server-side code, they can be distributed instead of living on a single server. Serving directly from a CDN unlocks speeds and performance that can’t be beat. The more of your app you can push to the edge, the better the user experience.

Better PerformanceWhy wait for pages to build on the fly when you can generate them at deploy time? When it comes to minimizing the time to first byte, nothing beats pre-built files served over a CDN.

Better contribution workflow: We will be using GitHub’s contribution tools and features, essentially moving MDN from a Wiki model to a pull request (PR) model. This is so much better for contribution, allowing for intelligent linting, mass edits, and inclusion of MDN docs in whatever workflows you want to add it to (you can edit MDN source files directly in your favorite code editor).

After that, the app works like an SPA. It's got better SEO because when a search engine bot asks for a page, the server returns the whole rendered HTML page, with content and meta tags.

SVG has the advantage that integrates very well with Svelte, since it’s an XML and the nodes can be managed as if they were HTML. On the other hand, Canvas is more efficient, but it has to be generated entirely with JavaScript.

They are rapid to develop, cross-platform and responsive by nature. JavaScript provides a lot of frameworks (such as Vue, React) and dedicated front-end component libraries to boost productivity (Bootstrap, Material UI). You write your code once and deploy you application on every platform;

These apps combine the best of web and native solutions:

Progressive Web Apps can be installed on most devices like native apps. They are meant to be reliable (work on each platform, even offline), fast and provide a native-like user experience.

If you are a developer and would like to fork, modify and/or contribute to this extesion, then this section is for you.

You may know several Procfile process management tools, but Overmind has some unique, extraterrestrial powers others don't:

The benefits that you get

Personally, I rather like the idea of typing into a field, backspacing to undo what you just typed, and having the field (and form) go back to being pristine. Aside from that aesthetic difference, my definition has the practical implication that it lets you know if you need to save the record or not.

withindex.js, we have a single source of truth, giving fine grained control on what we expose to the outside world.

import statements will become much smaller, as we will be importing stuff from less files. For example AbstractNode.js has only on import statement now, where it had two before.

The reason that this solves our problem is: we now have full control over the module loading order. Whatever the import order in internal.js is, will be our module loading order.

Abstract roles are provided to help with the following: Organize the role taxonomy and provide roles with a meaning in the context of known concepts.Streamline the addition of roles that include necessary features.

One of Svelte's advantages, for me, is that I can test out ideas with relatively few lines of code. the #with feature could save me from adding a separate component for the content of an #each loop. I get frustrated when I have to create a new file, move the content of the #each clause, import it as a component, and add attributes and create exports for that, and implement events to send messages back, and event handlers, when I just wanted to test a small feature.

With Angular 2 we can debounce using RxJS operator debounceTime() on a form control's valueChanges observable:

Of all the compile-to-languages, the one that strikes me as having the least merit is JSX. It's basically a ton of added complexity for the sake of what boils down to syntax. There are no real gains in terms of language semantics in JSX.

This is exactly what we need the vDOM for — we might not need it for reactive state updates, conditional rendering or list rendering, but as long as we have it we can treat our component hierarchy as fully dynamic and controllable object. You cannot code a serious fully declarative app without this feature.

This allows the shooter to relax and concentrate on the intended target at which they are shooting.

I'm also persuaded by the arguments that it will be easier to track stuff down by co-location.

The Svelte compiler does the dependency tracking work for us, so there’s no dependency array like in React.

If you are interested in a library that has the discipline of React, transparent implementation that doesn't cut corners for easiness, and all the performance to back it up maybe SolidJS is the library for you.

derived values are simple to declare

Why TypeScript?

Finally (and most exciting to me), Scoped CSS is ideal for working within Content Management Systems where you have much less flexibility for adding unique markup to common templated areas, or no access to the existing stylesheets.

Being able to use an empty file as a Svelte component was useful during refactoring, because I could just create a placeholder file for the new component, import it and start using it

Inline styles can't target states like hover or focus, but Tailwind's pseudo-class variants make it easy to style those states with utility classes.

Your CSS stops growing. Using a traditional approach, your CSS files get bigger every time you add a new feature. With utilities, everything is reusable so you rarely need to write new CSS.

Making changes feels safer. CSS is global and you never know what you're breaking when you make a change. Classes in your HTML are local, so you can change them without worrying about something else breaking.

Also, Rollup, which I use in the article as a bundler is pretty slow. Why? Because it needs to re-compile the whole shebang every time you change a file. It produces very small and efficient bundles though.

In some frameworks you may see recommendations to avoid inline event handlers for performance reasons, particularly inside loops. That advice doesn't apply to Svelte — the compiler will always do the right thing, whichever form you choose.

HTML templates

Multi-lines strings and indented strings

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

e present a protocol for secure online com-munication, called “off-the-record messaging”, which hasproperties better-suited for casual conversation than do sys-tems like PGP or S/MIME.

The biggest advantage of matrix/megolm is that you can always add new client logins, that aren't tied to your mobile phone login (as opposed to whatsapp/signal).

See this Hacker News comment thread for more discussion of the issues that might arise and some pro/con comparisons of using Alpine-based images.

After the initial backup, future backups are differential, both in the files that are transferred and the files that are stored on your behalf.

Advantages and disadvantages

The “universal” label that has been slapped on to it is superfluous, but it does have its merits. Now that we have a commonly known term to refer to environment agnostic JavaScript code, it allows library authors to list it as a feature and be fashionable doing it. I’m happy with the term “universal” being fashionable because it makes developers think about their dependencies on the runtime environment. In the end this will help the JavaScript ecosystem mature and allow libraries to be used everywhere.

A language that features polymorphism allows developers to program in the general rather than program in the specific. $(document).ready(function() { recordAdModuleData(2964, "impressions","Dictionary Ad"); });

polymorphism cuts down the work of the developer because he can now create a sort of general class with all the attributes and behaviors that he envisions for it. When the time comes for the developer to create more specific subclasses with certain unique attributes and behaviors, the developer can simply alter code in the specific portions where the behaviors differ. All other portions of the code can be left as is.

minitest doesn't reinvent anything that ruby already provides, like: classes, modules, inheritance, methods. This means you only have to learn ruby to use minitest and all of your regular OO practices like extract-method refactorings still apply.

Tired of wasteful printing? Teachers save valuable time by using Kami, enabling them to enhance workflow and collaborate with their students in real time. 

This protects you from government overreach, and protects your privacy, and makes identity theft a lot harder.

“Europeans' privacy will be better protected and companies benefit from a single set of rules across the EU.”

This method is easier to implement and it’s very high-performing in terms of load speed

Directly blocking the vendor scripts (using another prior blocking method), then executing them only after consent has been collected. This method requires more implementation work and it’s a bit slower in terms of execution time, but it allows personalized ads to be served from the first page view (where consent hasn’t been collected yet) and gives you more direct and solid control in regards to ensuring compliance.

Don't be discouraged when you get feedback about a method that isn't all sunshine and roses. Facets has been around long enough now that it needs to maintain a certain degree of quality control, and that means serious discernment about what goes into the library. That includes having in depth discussions the merits of methods, even about the best name for a method --even if the functionality has been accepted the name may not.

You’ll still see ads (but they may be less useful to you)

It let sets of people work with the same copy of a file, instead of (for example) having to copy the file, and hope their copy was up to date.

The main benefit I can see to having .bashrc sourced when running a (non-interactive) remote command is that shell functions can be run. However, most of the commands in a typical .bashrc are only relevant in an interactive shell

The user's usual setup (command aliases, environment variables, umask, etc.) are in effect when remote commands are run. The common practice of setting an account's shell to /bin/false to disable it will prevent the owner from running any commands, should authentication still accidentally succeed for some reason.

Pro: easy to set up Con: allows brute-force password guessing Con: requires password entry every time

Unlike similar tools that are scheduled to take backups at a fixed time of the day, Timeshift is designed to run once every hour and take snapshots only when a snapshot is due. This is more suitable for desktop users who keep their laptops and desktops switched on for few hours daily. Scheduling snapshots at a fixed time on such users will result in missed backups since the system may not be running when the snapshot is scheduled to run. By running once every hour and creating snapshots when due, Timeshift ensures that backups are not missed.

One of the most important features of rsync is the method it uses to synchronize preexisting files that have changed in the source directory. Rather than copying the entire file from the source, it uses checksums to compare blocks of the source and target files. If all of the blocks in the two files are the same, no data is transferred. If the data differs, only the block that has changed on the source is transferred to the target.

While there are so many tools to backup your systems, I find this method super easy and convenient, at least to me. Also, this method is way better than disk cloning with dd command. Because It doesn’t matter if your hard drive is different size, or use different filesystem.

It doesn't use a database (unlike Keepass) and thus doesn't open all passwords at once. Just one at a time. Since it's just a directory of encrypted files, you can access your passwords with any PGP-compatible tool.

ES modules enable tree-shaking (which, in general, is impossible with CommonJS modules).

Middleware works a lot like a decorator. It doesn't alter the original API of the service, but it can augment it with new features and concerns. This has the inherent advantage of allowing all thidparty code to have an influence over the behaviour, state, and UI of a component.

It is used to expose internal data from within a render prop component for making it accessible to other components within the render prop component's composition.