When you consider “my problem is solved this time” as documentation then a discord discussion can be considered good documentation. But If you want documentation as reference for everyone and don’t wan’t to repeat process/procedures every time some one needs it. It’s the worst platform for it. And For documentation we never want the first.

In this context email lists were the best of the best documentation ever.

Hey, this is not cool! Please think of us who learned English as a second or least. We still can’t keep up with the book English and you invent this shit?

I hate video links. The information could have been a few paragraphs of text that I could glance. Instead this much minutes of video that you can’t search, glance over, read while listening to something else… So it’s a pass for me.

I wouldn’t ever imagine to shed a tear for the processes I have killed in my whole life. I feel like a homicidal maniac.

this is not cancellation. This is Google taking a step back, and regroup to attack back.

Or IDF took it seriously?

First, persistency. You data lifecycle may not be directly proportional to your applications lifecycle. You may need it even after the app is shut down.

Second, RDBM systems provide a well defined memory/storage structure and API - “structured query language”. This enables you to easily query your data and acquire suitable views that are beneficial for your applications purposes.

Third, It’s always better to outsource your data layer to a battle tested, and trustworty database then trying to reinvent the wheel.

So this paves a road for you to focus on your business logic than splitting that focus for the data layer and business logic.

I see that the problem arises from the "visionary, but lower experienced newer developers (compared to the past generation) " trying to fix a world where “don’t touch it if it works crowd who has seen all old timers” built, by putting each layer over the older one. It has all the capabilities, but there is no “single vision”, no “well defined api”.

Old established paradigms are being broken. Some conventions are forgotten, new tooling and perspectives are being built.

Sure this means there is an unfortunate clash is happening.

I can’t say if this is a better, or wiser world or not, however I can only say this is the way now. You can adapt, try to embrace and push forward things or you can try to stay away and become one of the legendary Cobol developer crowd. We know they are there in the wild, but we can’t find them.

I suppose it’s “confusing perspective” worthy.

Then I hope it won’t get any traction.

I hope this is a joke and not intended to be real.

What? The? Fuck?

Python docs are mostly “reference” material. Which means it’s not intended to show you how things are done, but used as detailed descriptions of commands/statements/classes/methods.

This is why you are having trouble understanding it. You first need to go understand fundamentals of it and they will be useful when you need details and intricacies of something while using it.

Oh glorious BSG!

Classic Erdoğan idiocy.

Blender has great add-ons for 3dprinting too. And are you trying to advertise a software? There are shapes that are impossible to 3dprint, however overhangs are not one of them. You can use supports, you can reorient your design, you can use bridging…

Depends on your patience. If you are very impatient go for the 4 pro as it’s built for faster printing. Otherwise they are very similar for print quality.

I started 3d printing with resin printing too. But do you think it’s a good entry point for op’s this purpose?

CAD software is better suited for precision designing. I don’t know if you would require that kind of presicion for board game parts. At least for early stages it may not be a requirement.

I for one still use blender for kinda presicion 3d models.

In fact Neptune 3 pro can be cheaper option. It would be slower to print but still create perfect prints. I do print with A Neptune 3 plus, a larger version of the 3 pro, and quite happy with it.