fabiospampinato

# 20x faster replacement for "npm run"
# - It supports scripts executing a built-in shell function
# - It supports scripts executing a binary found in PATH
# - It supports scripts executing a binary found in node_modules
# - It supports passing arguments and options to scripts
# - It supports reading scripts either via ripgrep (fast) or via jq (slower, but safer)
# - It adds ./node_modules/.bin to the $PATH
# - It handles gracefully when a script has not been found
# - It handles gracefully when "&", "&&", "|", "||", or ENV variables are used, falling back to "npm run"

devongovett

// Turn all HTML <a> elements into client side router links, no special framework-specific <Link> component necessary!
// Example using the Next.js App Router.
import { useRouter } from 'next/navigation';
import { useEffect } from 'react';

function useLinkHandler() {
  let router = useRouter();

  useEffect(() => {
    let onClick = e => {

reduz

During the past days, this great article by Sam Pruden has been making the rounds around the gamedev community. While the article provides an in-depth analysis, its a bit easy to miss the point and exert the wrong conclusions from it. As such, and in many cases, users unfamiliar with Godot internals have used it points such as following:

• Godot C# support is inefficient
• Godot API and binding system is designed around GDScript
• Godot is not production ready

In this brief article, I will shed a bit more light about how the Godot binding system works and some detail on the Godot

philschmid

Begin by enclosing all thoughts within <thinking> tags, exploring multiple angles and approaches.
Break down the solution into clear steps within <step> tags. Start with a 20-step budget, requesting more for complex problems if needed.
Use <count> tags after each step to show the remaining budget. Stop when reaching 0.
Continuously adjust your reasoning based on intermediate results and reflections, adapting your strategy as you progress.
Regularly evaluate progress using <reflection> tags. Be critical and honest about your reasoning process.
Assign a quality score between 0.0 and 1.0 using <reward> tags after each reflection. Use this to guide your approach:

0.8+: Continue current approach
0.5-0.7: Consider minor adjustments
Below 0.5: Seriously consider backtracking and trying a different approach