Fun fact: you're commenting on a site that uses tables for layout. It's not an unholy mess though, as it doesn't have sidebars or other really complicated stuff.
"heavy use of tables". I ran into a script once that took a picture as input and output a massive HTML table with a cell for each pixel and a background color. "Pure html" images without CSS or base64.
Not really, that's just one of the opinions, another could be to have opinionated defaults with an option to change anything, so highway isn't the only alternative
no, configurable only captures the second part, there are plenty of projects that are configurable, but have bad defaults, leaving everything to be set up properly by every single user instead of doing tha config upfront (and expressing an opinion re. how it should be configured)
For example
- being able to change an encryption protocol is "configurable"
- Setting the default to be unencrypted so that the user chooses it is "unopinionated defaults".
- Setting the most modern encryption protocol by default is "opinionated defaults"
All defaults are opinionated defaults. The fact that you consider a particular default "bad" supports that claim more than anything.
To your point, setting the default to be unencrypted reflects the opinion "this layer of the stack shouldn't be responsible for handling encryption unless the user has no other choice".
You are welcome to think what you want. The opinion I've expressed here is based on my lived experience with the "no hello" concept as promulgated within a real life workplace---likely before this article was written, but I don't feel the article is a significant improvement on the other communication approaches I've seen. People are very imperfect readers and there is a reason the concept of 'burying the lede' exists.
Fantastic docs, and primo documentation is not to be underestimated. Picking it up was a cinch.
Personally I love single file components. In specified having html, js and my scss in the same file, but split into <template>, <script setup>, and <style>. Nuxt 3 is fantastic DX.
I don't think the article dodges the question at all. Did you properly read it or just skim it? It goes over multiple ways of desalinating water, distillation and osmosis - as you also cover. The most relevant paragraph to the question and a bit of a conclusion seems to be:
>And that’s the problem with desalination. It’s kind of like the nuclear power of water supply. It seems so simple on the surface, but when you add up all the practical costs and complexities, it gets really hard to justify over other alternatives. It’s also harder to compare costs between those alternatives because of desal’s unique problems. It’s just a newer technology, so it’s harder to predict hidden technical, legal, political, and environmental challenges. For example, because of the high energy demands, desalination can strongly couple water costs with electricity costs. During a drought, the cost of hydropower goes up because there’s less water available, increasing overall energy costs and thus making desalination less viable right when you need it most.
I wish they'd actually shown more/talked about it though.
reply