founded on the principles of the free speech, independent thought and rejecting political censorship and “cancel culture”.

The WebSocket Protocol is designed on the principle that there should be minimal framing (the only framing that exists is to make the protocol frame-based instead of stream-based and to support a distinction between Unicode text and binary frames). It is expected that metadata would be layered on top of WebSocket by the application Fette & Melnikov Standards Track [Page 9] RFC 6455 The WebSocket Protocol December 2011 layer, in the same way that metadata is layered on top of TCP by the application layer (e.g., HTTP). Conceptually, WebSocket is really just a layer on top of TCP that does the following: o adds a web origin-based security model for browsers o adds an addressing and protocol naming mechanism to support multiple services on one port and multiple host names on one IP address o layers a framing mechanism on top of TCP to get back to the IP packet mechanism that TCP is built on, but without length limits o includes an additional closing handshake in-band that is designed to work in the presence of proxies and other intermediaries Other than that, WebSocket adds nothing. Basically it is intended to be as close to just exposing raw TCP to script as possible given the constraints of the Web. It's also designed in such a way that its servers can share a port with HTTP servers, by having its handshake be a valid HTTP Upgrade request. One could conceptually use other protocols to establish client-server messaging, but the intent of WebSockets is to provide a relatively simple protocol that can coexist with HTTP and deployed HTTP infrastructure (such as proxies) and that is as close to TCP as is safe for use with such infrastructure given security considerations, with targeted additions to simplify usage and keep simple things simple (such as the addition of message semantics).

The goal of this technology is to provide a mechanism for browser-based applications that need two-way communication with servers that does not rely on opening multiple HTTP connections (e.g., using XMLHttpRequest or <iframe>s and long polling).

Closing as kit will be serverless first!

Seamless transitions; changes made to the old repositories after they were migrated must be imported to the new monorepository.

Our requirements:

None of the existing repository filtering tools did what I wanted; they all came up short for my needs. No tool provided any of the first eight traits below I wanted, and all failed to provide at least one of the last four traits as well:

When Sprockets was introduced, one of the opinions that it held strongly, is that assets such as CSS and JS should be bundled together and served in one file.

Set your models free from the accepts_nested_attributes_for helper. Action Form provides an object-oriented approach to represent your forms by building a form object, rather than relying on Active Record internals for doing this.

I open this issue to announce that i'm actively working on a rewrite of this library to accomplish these goals:

This is basically a design goal at this point, even though it has evolved organically.

We aim to support all svelte features. In some cases this is not possible. For those cases we provided feasible workarounds.

ECMAScript 6th Edition (ECMA-262) introduces template literals which are intended to be used for embedding DSL in ECMAScript.

We get a boilerplate-free API where shared state has the same simple get/set interface as React local state (yet can be encapsulated with reducers etc. if needed).

Because Svelte is a compiler, we're not bound to the peculiarities of JavaScript: we can design a component authoring experience, rather than having to fit it around the semantics of the language.

Reducing the amount of code you have to write is an explicit goal of Svelte.

For my point of view, and I've been annoyingly consistent in this for as long as people have been asking for this feature or something like it, style encapsulation is one of the core principles of Svelte's component model and this feature fundamentally breaks that. It would be too easy for people to use this feature and it would definitely get abused removing the style safety that Svelte previously provided.

And of course, if you don't use them you don't pay for them

the notion that any given component should be in charge of its own thing, and not do something outside of itself. I.e., loosely coupled components in a sandbox, not tightly coupled to something outside of its own scope.

Since one of Svelte's main principles is reacting only to data changes (as opposed to re-render the whole app with the full state all the time)

I mean, it's not that bad and it's certainly not much of a runtime cost (especially since it'd only affect components which actually use it -- thanks disappearing framework!).

It is designed to protect only system files and settings. User files such as documents, pictures and music are excluded. This ensures that your files remains unchanged when you restore your system to an earlier date.

dead simple to use as possible. No clutter, no distractions

Goals

AdNauseam is a work in progress, with new features continually being added, tuned, and, sometimes, deprecated. If a setting no longer appears in the settings page, we have likely found a better means of implementing the design goal.

I'd slightly challenge: "By definition, resolving a CAPTCHA cannot be automated". The design goals are that it cannot be automated; however, not being automatable(?) does not follow by definition.

The chosen approach pushes a lot of complexity out of the core. As a result it might take more code to achieve certain functionalities. This is the price of flexibility. And that's the primary design goal of Reactabular.

Reactabular has been designed to be extensible. Rather than implementing a lot of functionality in its core, it provides extension points. You can, for instance, customize rendering on cell level. It is possible to implement functionality, such as search, pagination, sorting, and inline editing, through composition.

As online learning matures, it is important for both theorists and practitioners to understand how to apply new and emerging educational practices and technologies that foster a sense of community and optimize the online learning environment.

In summary, our main goal was to examine how students' achievement goals are related to changes in self-efficacy, preference to avoid challenge, and intrin sic value in the face of evaluation. Early in the semester, we assessed students' achievement goals, self-efficacy, desire to avoid challenge, and intrinsic value. We assessed students' self-efficacy, desire to avoid challenge, and intrinsic value again immediately after they received their grades on their first major exam or paper. This design allowed us to examine the role of goals in the change in mo tivational constructs associated with performance feedback. Our main hypothe ses were (a) a mastery goal will be associated with enhanced motivation around receipt of grades (i.e., increased efficacy and value and lower preference for chal lenge avoidance); (b) a performance-avoidance goal will be associated with di minished motivation around receipt of grades (i.e., decreased efficacy and value and increased preference for challenge avoidance); and (c) the effects of a per formance-approach goal on changes in motivation will be moderated by grades. When students encounter low grades, a performance-approach goal will be relat ed to diminished motivation. When students receive high grades, a performance approach goal will be unrelated to changes in motivation.