Also faker.js

My point is, clear up your mistakes in communication. It doesn’t help anyone to spread misinformation. I hate MS as the linux guy next door, but making false accusations, intentionally or not, will make people stay away from you. Because as I stated, I immediately understand the context just from you sending ToS of a plugin owned by MS. But your accusation is different entirely than your intention.

I never have a problem with your follow up, even if you still did not specify your intention explicitly. At least the ToS is for a plugin that is owned by MS so it provides a clue to what you’re referring to. I have a problem with your original statement.

… A lot of the functionality is in the marketplace but non Microsoft products aren’t legally allowed to use it and you’re not allowed to distribute builds of the plugins.

To put differently:

A lot of the functionality is in the marketplace. Non MS products aren’t legally allowed to use it (1). You’re not allowed to distribute builds of the plugin(s) (2).

See the problem? That statement with the follow up is accusing MS restricting your right to use MS marketplace from non MS product as a problem (1), and THEN accusing that you cannot distribute the build of the plugins from said marketplace (2) which is only true for MS owned plugins.

Yes, hence why I commented that MS never prohibits you from publishing your extension elsewhere. Nor does MS forbid you from using other marketplaces when using their product. It’s like saying valve is prohibiting game dev from publishing their game elsewhere or distributing their game outside of steam. It’s just not true. And MS has all the right to limit their marketplace to their own client too. After all, it is first and foremost, their service for their product specifically. It’s like you’re making an unofficial client for youtube.

Then specify MS plugins. If you only said plugins on MS marketplace, you are blaming MS for things they didn’t do

deleted by creator

You are allowed wtf. If the plugin author didn’t distribute it elsewhere, it’s on them. MS doesn’t forbid them from uploading the extension build elsewhere, they just wanted their marketplace not getting requests from not-their-client which is a fair point for a for profit company.

Did you not disable the unneeded plugins on a project? I wouldn’t turn on the rust plugins for a js project if the codebase doesn’t have it

Pick a hardware to tinker with. I’d suggest a development kit rather than some cheap mcu-psu-downloader-only board. Now listen, it may be more on the expensive side, but you don’t have to deal with hardware trouble first since many development board usually provide a lot of functionality to play with.

Second, check the official documentation for said devkit and play with it. You’ll ended up immersing yourself on your selected manufacturer but that’s fine for learning.

After you’ve more understanding of the workflow for embedded development, then I can safely advice you to start exploring. A simple one would be programming the same board but using a different workflow. You may ended up with the manufacturer IDE, and wondering how to get to your beloved editor for example. Then you start to learn the build workflow until download and debug step.

I don’t understand. What do you mean by deciding what the code should do in the context of language design? Can you give a concrete example? I am confused because the “main” function is required when you make an executable. Otherwise, a library will not contain any main function and we could compile it just fine no? (Shared library)

What is not hacky then in a language design?

Oh he is crazy alright. Just look at his videos making guitar hero… USING GUITAR!

I was looking for this comment. I knew someone from Lemmy would have seen that