What makes this URL an API?

Do they disclose it as free use anywhere?

Funny how three comments that follow, by other people, do not get such a comment by the bot.

It also seems like the comment addresses a commenter, not the PR creator, so saying “you may resubmit after fixing” makes no sense. Post the comment again?

OpenGL is an API standard. It defines data structures, operation interfaces, and behavior.

Mesa 3D is an implementation of OpenGL. It can be used so users of OpenGL can call it to draw stuff.

Vulkan is a newer API standard. It is newer and was designed with a lot of new hardware and hardware capabilities in mind, and significantly reduced what the job of the API is supposed to do compared to OpenGL. Essentially giving API users many more opportunities to control graphics pipeline behavior for better efficiency and performance. Libraries and frameworks exist that provide more convenience and prepared setup or opinionated usage patterns on top of Vulkan.

DirectX had a similar shift with DirectX version 12, which also implemented closer-to-hardware APIs similar to Vulkan vs OpenGL.

/edit: Noteworthy are also OpenGL and Vulkan extensions. They extend the core API with additional APIs. An app can check if they are supported, and if the driver supports it, can use them.

I value choosing between two styles by feel for improving readability and conciseness.

For example, allowing one-liner early-returns if they are concise enough. If they are not, they must be multi-line with a block with curly braces. There’s no linter rule that defines what “simple enough” is, and most linters don’t do rules with condition either.

Web is just one kind of frontend though. And there’s more ways to target web with JavaScript interfacing than transpiling to JavaScript.

Why is single line comments listed when it’s green for all of them? Do they not have multi-line comments?

What are "frontend language"s?

Just wondering if this is very incomplete or due to scoping.

A standard for build output might make sense to me. Maybe just throw cache stuff in .cache and build output to .build (with intermediate artifacts in there as well potentially).

When enabled via flag, dotnet puts stuff into artifacts/obj, artifacts/bin, and artifacts/publish respectively. I like that. So much better than every proj folder having their own.

And there’s really no need to make it a dot folder. For the publish you don’t want to anyway. And you may want to navigate to bin as well, to run a build or inspect the output.

A bit too broad to give a specific answer from my side.

Overall, I prefer web based over apps, because I can CSS hack and if necessary JS hack them.

Web also means it doesn’t litter my PC or mobile phone or tablet. And that it can’t fetch more data than it needs or I want it to have access to.

Bad software is bad software, no matter if it’s installed or on the web.