I think you can be a billionaire and a good person at the same time. That is not mutually exclusive, just because most are bad persons. Therefore I do not agree with your argumentation. But I accept your opinion.
I know, but with the last version they did not support Linux anymore. The version before that was supported on Linux. So its unclear at the moment if the next version will do.
I know how subcommands work. But that is not the point I am making. Having two dashes in front of it or not like pacman remove or pacman --remove does not change how the command operates. It is literally having two dashes or not and therefore is not an issue.
I don't think it would make ANY difference if the option was named git --pull instead git pull (you don't have to use the single uppercase). That is NOT the same semantic difference between
<b>
and
<h3>
, because it (the pull example) operates the same as before. The only difference are the two dashes. I don't see how this creates confusion or learning difficulties.
I don't get why that is a problem. It's just an option name with 2 dashes in front. In fact, that is the "correct" way of handling options, as in standard option processing in GNU / Linux. I personally dislike options without dash, but on the other hand it does not bother me enough to be bothered by it. pacman --remove is almost identical to pacman remove, so I don't know why that is a "problem".
I don't think there is some exceptional good CLI interfaces. If anything, you either notice the interface is bad or unconventional or it is cluttered, because it has lots of functionality. It also depends if it "should" fit into the Linux eco system (similar commandline system and logic) or is this tool used for any operating system. I have my own scripts as wrapper for some tools, so they are excluded from discussions here. Note I think the discussion is about commandline interfaces that operate non interactive (in other words no "live" TUIs or interactive editors), so no Vim or htop.
Tools like yt-dlp or awk or find or git are complex and overloaded with functionality, because it offers so much and has to offer all of that. Or the command works different, because of its nature of calling another command like parallel. Then there are commandlines that just deviates from the standard and bugs me a lot. One of the worst offenders to me is 7z from package extra/7zip in the Arch repositories. But it is not a standard GNU tool, therefore it does its own thing.
So in the end, I do not think there is an exceptional good CLI, only bad or complicated ones. As long as it follows Linux standards its good to go. Often the best Rust CLI tools have pretty good ones that could be listened as standouts, but none specific in particular.
There was outlier in GNOME outperforming KDE by a large amount too.
Edit: Okay, maybe not that large. I agree with you, that the outlier they had (included twice even) has a huge impact. But it is some real game and with real settings and configuration. So making an exempt just because you don't like the results would be faking the result. They just should have included a result without the outlier, just for comparison.
I was under the impression that the desktop environment (especially GNOME vs KDE) performs about the same in gaming or graphics in general. Some of the results are pretty shocking to me how much they can differ.
I don't know, but to me this doesn't look soulless or sloppy at all. As they explain:
It mirrors reality, but its unique appeal comes from the setting errors and how they feel out of place, such as taxis sinking into floors, or buses sprouting from walls.
It's more about the errors that typically happen with Ai too. But it can be something your art direction wants to have, and by accident it looks like Ai generated. I don't think they want it to have look like Ai generated on purpose, but the art they are going with looks by accident like Ai.
Distortion is when something takes a shape that people have never seen before, and things unseen before are considered unique. But if the shapes are too unusual, players might think they’re related to puzzles or that the terrain has some hidden meaning. Balancing distortion to be both unique and merely background was difficult,
EverQuest Legends™ (EQL) is a newly reimagined version of classic EverQuest from its original release in 1999. Featuring all the fun magic and nostalgia of the original game, EQL is also packed with tons of new features and quality of life enhancements.
So it's basically a Remake of EverQuest. Not sure how this is comparable to WoW Classic or even Old School RuneScape classic, which are not Remakes, but an earlier state of the game.
EQL has been designed from the ground up to appeal to players who enjoy playing their games solo and/or casually. While groups (up to 4 players) and raids (up to 8 players) are available, the entire game can be played, enjoyed, and experienced solo if that’s your playstyle.
That's good. My only problem with these kind of games is, you have to pay a monthly subscription.
I think you can be a billionaire and a good person at the same time. That is not mutually exclusive, just because most are bad persons. Therefore I do not agree with your argumentation. But I accept your opinion.