I don’t get the title. Why is it “A Git story: Not so fun this time”? What is not so fun time referring to?
I don’t get the title. Why is it “A Git story: Not so fun this time”? What is not so fun time referring to?
You didn’t even describe how it’s on the website.
I would use the webbrowser/Firefox save page functionality.
Or open the webbrowser dev tools and document.querySelectorAll('img')
and get the URLs from it and use those.
Or Page info media tab.
Or dev tools network tab. To identify and use the image web requests.
Or use Nushell with query module enabled, and http get query html.
Or my own C# until.
But I suspect there’s Auth in play, so the only easy access is within the browser session?
Earlier this week for a character range.
/edit: Now I remember. For setting up a new entry in Jenkins CI build failure analysis - identifying the build failure cause in the log.
Seemed verbose, overengineered, unnecessary framework introducing complexity. I didn’t see a strong use case for it, maybe for a lack of an obvious one or my understanding of it.
It also didn’t leave a strong impression. I had to look at the site and goal/description to remember.
Maybe some niche data handlers and implementors have use for it. But a Wikimedia project seems overblown for that.
I have not used it though. I’m open to being shown and corrected.
What conclusion did you come to?
He’s gonna live a long life. Until we know pi.
I really like Calendar Versioning CalVer.
Gives so much more meaning to version numbers. Immediately obvious how old, and from when.
Nobody knows when Firefox 97 released. If it were 22.2
you’d know it’s from February 2022.
It doesn’t conflict with semver either. You can use y.M.<release>
. (I would prefer using yy.MM.
but leading 0 is not semver.)
In my Firefox I get a NS_BINDING_ABORTED
error on the Google Fonts font request.
And they didn’t specify a font fallback, only their external web font. It would have worked if they had added monospace
as a fallback.
Ignoring secondary email addresses, what was my primary [onlineaccount] E-Mail address has changed four times.
Nested CSS obscures complexity
An interesting point. Something I will take with me for observation and consideration.
Maybe sometimes it’s worth despite it and other times not.
extending the list
Seems like a valid formalization.
I think a or a few counter-examples would go a long way though.
The “rectangle” probably isn’t supposed to be this messy?
Are you saying “don’t use a synthetic key, you ain’t gonna need it”?
People regularly change email addresses. Listing that as an example is a particularly bad example in my opinion.
many2one: so in this relationship you will have more than one record in one table which matches to only one record in another table. something like A <-- B. where (<–) is foreign key relationship. so B will have a column which will be mapped to more than one record of A.
no, the other way around
When B has a foreign key to A, many B records may relate to one A record. That’s the many2one part.
The fact that different B records can point to different A records is irrelevant to that.
one2many: same as many2one but instead now the foreign key constrain will look something like A --> B.
It’s the same, mirrored. Or mirrored interpretation / representation to be more specific. (No logical change.)
If you had B --> A for many2one, then the foreign key relationship is still B --> A. But if you want to represent it from A perspective, you can say one2many - even though A does not hold the foreign keys.
In relational database schemata, using foreign keys on a column means the definition order is always one to one, and only through querying for the shared id will you identify the many.
many2many: this one is interesting because this relationship doesn’t make use of foreign key directly. to have this relationship between A and B you have to make a third database something like AB_rel. AB_rel will hold values of primary key of A and also primary key of B. so that way we can map those two using AB_rel table.
Notably, we still make use of foreign keys. But because one record does not necessarily have only one FK value we don’t store it in a column but have to save it in a separate table.
This association table AB_rel will then hold the foreign keys to both sides.
What makes it “anonymous”? You’re uploading a file to a server, right? That’s hardly anonymous.
If this is about the onion link in the repo metadata, then I think the description not making that obvious is at least misleading. There’s a fundamental difference in what the repo/tool provides and what a specific hosted website provides.
When something hits you in the face you turn blue. This essentially hits you in the face, and matches that color.
Ask your profs or other applicable personnel for offered final year projects, suggestions, and previous years projects. You can also check software dev companies which may offer such projects as job openings. That’ll give you more of an overview of current common projects, and some ideas of what you could do.
Quite elaborate but also very interesting read on git and version control history.