This is going to be one of my favorite releases since 2.8, which added conditional types. So many bad utility functions will be able to go away. The only thing it seems to be missing is variadic type generics.
I had some minor luck with capturing 3D objects in Meshroom, then using Blender to refine/simplify the model, before taking it into Meshmixer to prepare for actual 3D printing.
I don't know how phone cameras hold up, but I was able to achieve decent results with a DSLR and some daylight lighting.
I love exploring different fields that I really know little about. One of my favorite channels is NileRed (and alternative channel NileBlue) which is a chemistry channel that really acts like a proper science channel. NileBlue has recently been showing the clean-up process of projects featured on the main channel, which are just as interesting.
Unfortunately this will never happen. The C++ committee, to my understanding, has made it very clear that they want to bless no tooling and are only concerned with the language itself.
Maybe it would be a better situation of a secondary organization started up that acted similarly to how NodeJS as a tooling platform operates with ECMAScript, the language definition.
I'm really quite fond of C++ the language, but the tooling around it always makes me hesitant to try anything new with it when so many other languages' ecosystems have come so far.
There have been several projects that were flow based that have moved to TS. I think the real litmus test will be if React eventually either includes TS types or is rewritten in TS.
Disclaimer: I work with TypeScript professionally.
I'm pretty in tune with what's going on around React, and I don't see that one ever happening.
The React team is _very_ busy already with work around Hooks, Concurrent Mode, and Suspense. There's no way they're going to pause development on implementing all these major chunks of functionality just to rewrite from one type system to another.
I've seen Dan express some frustration with Flow's pace of development on Twitter a couple times, but beyond that, no indications whatsoever that React would be converted to TS. In the entirely hypothetical scenario that React _did_ get rewritten to another language, I have to assume it would be something like ReasonML (which was created by Jordan Walke, the original creator of React).
Given that React is already heavily invested in Flow types, there would be _some_ form of rewrite.
And like I said, Flow is providing sufficient benefit for the React team right now, and their focus is on expanding React's capabilities. Changing type systems is not on their radar as far as I know.
Oh— can you point me at a file in particular? I had a look around the codebase and didn't see anything but plain JS. Might have been looking in the wrong places.
And I certainly get your point. However I wonder if they'd consider community-contributed TypeScript declaration files to the official repo as they wouldn't cause conflicts with the Flow system—
As for the TS typings, there's been lots of agitation from people asking them to be officially included and shipped with React. But, again, the React devs themselves aren't TS users (that I know of), and so they don't have the expertise to write and maintain those typings. Better that they be left over in DefinitelyTyped for the community to maintain.
(I'm a Redux maintainer, and I feel exactly the same way about the typings for React-Redux. I don't have any actual TS experience myself yet, and I couldn't do anything useful in regards to the React-Redux typings. Plus, I've got far too much else on my plate to worry about those.)
I think a lot of it has to do with consumer expectations. We can all sit here and laugh and act unsurprised, but technology has conditioned users that the response isn't sent until you press "Send". Its bad (and I'd argue harmful) UX.
Imagine this scenario: Copying and pasting a debug log, realizing it contains personal or important information (such as password, SSN, or anything else) and it is sent to the agent before you have a chance to redact that info. Or it could be accidentally pasting the wrong thing. I know that I've accidentally pasted Twitter links into my code before.
EDIT: Just to clarify my point. If you're going to break deeply entrenched user expectations, especially in ways that are often used maliciously: explicitly say you are subverting those expectations.
The same reason there are "This call may be recorded" messages when calling in, it shouldn't hurt much to add a "For quality assurance purposes, your keypresses may be logged in the chat window".
And if it does hurt, then you should realize your subversion is malicious.
I think you're right. I also think the browser, as your agent, should enforce expectations. "This website wants to upload data. Allow? [Once] [Always] [No] [Click here to see the data.]"