It’s great that there’s interest in this stuff. Your articles are inspiring, as is Jillian Hess’s NotesSubstack, team Greene/Holiday/Oppenheimer, and the German scholars who focus on the technology of writing, such as Hektor Haarkötter. But I don’t see this as nostalgia. For me it’s history in service of the present and the future.

And yeah, you two should probably gang up :)

what is the difference? and why do you write it from scratch?

When we see the world from the vantage point of all-at-oneness, always right here, we can be said to be like a pearl in a bowl. Flowing with every turn without any obstructions or stoppages coming from our emotional reactions to different situations. This is a very commonly used image in Zen — moving like a pearl in a bowl. As usual, our ancestors comment on this phrase, wanting to break open our solidifying minds even more. Working from Dogen’s fascicle Shunju, Spring and Autumn, we have an example of opening up even the Zen appropriate phrase — a pearl in a bowl. Editor of the Blue Cliff Record Engo ( Yuan Wu) wrote: A bowl rolls around a pearl, and the pearl rolls around the bowl. The absolute in the relative and the relative in the absolute.   Dogen: The present expression “a bowl rolls around a pearl” is unprecedented and inimitable, it has rarely been heard in eternity. Hitherto, people have spoken only as if the pearl rolling in the bowl were ceaseless.

I’ve spent years studying how prolific writers, artists, and thinkersof the past managed their creative process. I’ve spent countlesshours researching how human beings can use technology to extendand enhance our natural cognitive abilities. I’ve personally

three steps required to solve the all-importantcorrespondence problem. Step one, according to Shenkar: specify one’s ownproblem and identify an analogous problem that has been solved successfully.Step two: rigorously analyze why the solution is successful. Jobs and hisengineers at Apple’s headquarters in Cupertino, California, immediately got towork deconstructing the marvels they’d seen at the Xerox facility. Soon theywere on to the third and most challenging step: identify how one’s owncircumstances differ, then figure out how to adapt the original solution to thenew setting.

In fact, npm is not trying to reinvent the wheel. You can find similarities between all three Workspace implementations.

Rather than write new tooling we decided to take advantage of tooling we had in place for our unit tests. Our unit tests already used FactoryBot, a test data generation library, for building up test datasets for a variety of test scenarios. Plus, we had already built up a nice suite of helpers that we coud re-use. By using tools and libraries already a part of the backend technology’s ecosystem we were able to spend less time building additional tooling. We had less code to maintain because of this and more time to work on solving our customer’s pain points.

MJML comes out of the box with a set of standard components to help you build easily your first templates without having to reinvent the wheel.

from my point of view, it is (by far) the best way, to build a layer on top https://github.com/material-components/material-components-web . This is also the path that the Angular Material team has taken, although they have already made a huge effort to create the components themselves.

This is Sass based, and therefore doesn't require Svelte components

Of course you can start implementing your own thing, but you will waste a lot of precious time reinventing the wheel. Why not take advantage of a validation library that takes care of all this complexity for you?

You can try to build a solution to tackle these issues on your own, but it will cost you time and money... why not use a battle-tested solution to handle all this complexity?

Other frameworks, which use a template syntax built atop HTML — Svelte, Vue, Ractive, Glimmer etc — have historically been fragmented, meaning those tools need to be reinvented many times.

Why not just use that instead of inventing a syntax that's not part of ECMAScript?

Why struggle with custom Syntax DSLs when you can use one so widely supported?

People constantly suggest that I should have just worked with a different library instead of writing another one.

The main rationale for this PR is that, in my hones opinion, Svelte needs a way to support style overrides in an intuitive and close to plain HTML/CSS way. What I regard as intuitive is: Looking at how customizing of styles is being done when applying a typical CSS component framework, and making that possible with Svelte.

Why make another UI component kit when we already got Smelte and SMUI? What's so special about Svelta?

They write their own function because it’s easier and more fun than figuring out how the old function works.

Många upplever sina största svårigheter i relationer med andra särskilt med de mest nära, kära och intima. Lev livet fullt ut visar oss hur våra relationer kan vara en ingång till ett andligt uppvaknande, om vi använder oss av dem på ett klokt och vist sätt.

Dessa ingångar eller portar, som han kallar dem, kan alla användas för att ta oss tillbaka till nuet, där inga problem finns. Det är bara i nuet som vi hittar glädjen och kan omfamna vårt sanna jag.

Dessa ingångar eller portar, som han kallar dem, kan alla användas för att ta oss tillbaka till nuet, där inga problem finns.