100% worth it.

I've never heard someone say that before. Why would you want one but not the other, if you don't mind my asking?

It is not at all the same definition. A CDN is not a programming language library, which is how I had defined frameworks (with other qualifiers). All frameworks are (one or more) libraries in a programming language. A CDN is, ultimately, a network of running servers that serve up content. It's a distribution mechanism for content, not a method of building software applications (which is what frameworks are). You can use a CDN to deliver the code for a framework/library to a web browser (or anywhere else, really), but that is not the same as saying that it is a framework itself, because it is not.

A bunch of people in this thread, including myself, have been trying to help answer your original question (part of which is clarifying terms, since you seem to be confused about how things work, which is understandable for someone inexperienced), and yet you've been very combative and lashing out at people in spite of describing yourself as an amateur. When experts in the field correct your misunderstandings, it's wise to learn from the information you're given rather than telling everyone that they are wrong. Your attitude will not get you very far and will simply make people unwilling to help you learn.

I mean, that's simply an incorrect definition and not what anyone means when they use the word, speaking as a senior engineer working on web applications over the last 10 years. Such a broad definition is practically meaningless since it encompasses pretty much everything in programming.

A database is 100% not a "framework", it is a software application that allows clients to retrieve data by supplying queries in a dedicated DSL.

cdnjs is also decidedly not a framework, nor is any other CDN. CDNs are an infrastructural component in networking that allows content to be cached in servers that are geographically distributed over large distances in order to reduce the effects of network transmission time (since content can be served from servers closer to the client). It has very little to do with programming.

A framework is a library (or possibly, set of related libraries) in a programming language that aims to be very "batteries-included", insofar as the programmer gives up precise control over the program they are creating in exchange for having many commonly-needed things for the task (typically, SPAs or web servers) already done for them. The reason I said it's perhaps ill-defined as a word is that the line between what counts as a library and what counts as a framework is a bit blurry.

I think you're using the word "framework" quite broadly here. Cloudflare and databases aren't "frameworks". The word is perhaps ill-defined, but generally it means something like "an opinionated library ecosystem in a programming language". React, Vue, and the like are Javascript "framework" libraries for making what are called Single Page Applications. They are hardly the only way to make websites, though, and some (including yours truly) believe them to much more trouble than they are worth for most purposes.

Laravel, Django, Ruby on Rails, etc. are all backend/server-side "framework" libraries for creating Multi-Page Applications, or in other words, the model for which the web was originally designed (that is, you get HTML and follow links embedded in that HTML to get to new pages).

At any rate, a "file system for a website" is quite vague. It really depends on what your goals are. You have to define what is you're trying to do and who it's for. It's not particularly difficult to spin up an sftp server to allow remote access to files if all you care about is remote copying, but I'm going to assume you mean a file server served over HTTP(S).

There's about a million tools out there for serving up static files, getting a directory listing, etc., and it really depends on your goals. It's fairly simple to configure nginx to serve up a directory with a very rudimentary index if you don't need anything fancy (nginx can do fancy too, ofc, just takes more work than what comes out of the box). I personally like Caddy over nginx these days, though. Caddy in particular requires very little configuration, honestly.

But yeah, without more information about what is is you're trying to accomplish, it's difficult to give specific recommendations.

Traditionally, the global flag is used to mean global within a line, meaning all matches in a line.

Looks like a category theory book. And they're right: using A to notate the identity arrow is ridiculous.

Absolutely beautiful.

I tried out a 4x10 work week for a while and it was alright, but not as great as I thought it would be. Mostly because I had effectively no time during the work week to get any household chores done, so we ended up just cramming everything into the weekend anyway, largely negating the purpose of having the extra day.

But yeah, if I could do a 32 hour work week that would be incredible.

Where I work, they don't really give a shit if you have to go to an appointment or whatever. You just let people know you're going to be out at such and such time and that's it. No micromanaging of time since we're all adults and know what our deadlines and deliverables are. It's a salaried position, though.

If I had no flexibility at all that would definitely be pretty miserable.

The reason it's so popular is because it provides directional navigation on the home row, with the direction that's by far the most common (down) under your strongest, dominant finger (the index finger).

It's much better for both efficiency and ergonomics than arrow keys.

Aw man, really? Why do all of the greats have to be so shitty?

China is capitalist, even though they pretend not to be.

ahem

git diff

That is all. Thank you.

Good shit. Even if this kind of thing hit my work codebase (not that we use Java, but a different one), so be it. Maybe then they would realize how profoundly stupid all of this is.

I assume you're just saying that's what they think? Because that's very, very far from reality.

It's only frustrating if you're solely focused on winning rather than improving, and especially if you do what I so often see, which is view your chess skill as a proxy for your intelligence (and thus take losses as a personal insult).

Smart people are not automatically great chess players. Chess is a skill you can develop that rewards time, dedication, patience, and lots and lots of practice (and losses).

In fact, losing a game of chess is incredibly valuable, and much more useful than almost any other game. You have a complete record of your game, and since no luck is involved, you can study your game and identify where you can improve. Reviewing your games is one of the best ways to get better at chess, and objectively looking at your game from both players' perspectives also helps to make it more about improvement rather than personal failure. In fact, it's fairly standard after an over the board game for both players to review the game together on the board and talk through lines and thoughts on the various positions of the game.

It's one of the things I really love about the game, because it's always about getting better rather than punishment for losing. It's much, much better than video games in this way.

When I play chess, I mostly just want to have a good game of chess, even if I lose. I always take the opportunity to play much higher rated players given the chance, because even though I will almost certainly lose, the game will be a very rich one to review and learn from.

No, you don't. No one needs this shit.

Monorepos don't really change anything. Squashed commits are still not atomic, unless the MR is small enough to fit into a single logical commit. Changes made to say, a database query are distinct from changes made to route handling, yet both might be needed for the overall feature. They don't belong in the same commit in history.

What they are describing is exactly the rhetoric I grew up absolutely surrounded by. It's extremely common.