Just trying not so confuse realistic testing with self-deception :) Not convinced testing with synthetic data can pretend to be similar to a production environment.

It is not realistic to replicate a production setup in development when you're working with sensitive user data. I've worked in different contexts (law enforcement, healthcare, financial services) where we've had complicated setups (in one instance including a thing called pre-staging environment), but never would a sizeable team of developers have access to user data, and thus to a realistic setup in terms of size, let alone of quality of data.

I'm sorry, but doesn't sound very convincing. The strongest (reiterated) argument is "venv is standard", but so is docker.

Thanks, corrected

Your seem to insist to twist this towards vegan wars, but this is you. It's not the graphics, it's not me.

Q: what do we do? A: profile and decompose. Should not be that distant as a thought

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%21 https://futurecoder.io/course/#IntroducingTheShell

The relevance of the post to the community should be made clear by the contents of the post. As it currently stands, there are no indicators that the event would have any influence on Iran's support for the Russian invasion.

I keeps amazing me how one could criticise capitalism and still talk exclusively in terms of capitalism.

Not a single word of the accelerating extreme deforestation of the world's forests all over the planet. And this is just an example. The same holds about drilling and plastics, about industrial farming, construction,... I don't care if they are profitable. They're just aggravating the problem and there are alternatives that reduce the problem. These need to be enforced, regardless whether they are profitable (some of them are, but they still don't overtake the problematic ones). We don't have collective enforcement and we need it. Call it green new deal if you want, call it anarcho-communism, whatever. As long as it is just theory and no practice, it's pointless.

Politics and growth are irrelevant if they are so detached from the problem.

The way you put it, it sounds that you have issues with the language. I can relate to that, but JS is what browsers understand natively. Probably using TypeScript is a good alternative, as static typing helps you keep afloat as the project grows.

As for Phaser itself (can be used with TypeScript), it depends what kind of game you're making. Even older versions of phaser have the typical programming affordances to make 2D games like assets and physics. Having said that, it's fair that other engines have visual editors, and possibly more tutorials and other resources.

But yes, phaser is hardly HTML, so weird choice for the course.

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.

Actually XPATH is arguably more flexible than JSON. There's also jsonpath, but I don't think I've seen it meaningfully used