can you elaborate on type=“datetime-local” not existing?

Oh goddamn, I hate web standards sometimes.

There used to be a proposal for datetime-local, but it was dropped, even though some browsers already supported it. That’s what I meant.

However, some years later the W3C added it to the standard again.

More info: https://webmasters.stackexchange.com/a/59541 https://stackoverflow.com/a/22654498/

So 1993?

What is wrong with the simple type=“datetime-local”

The problem with that is that it doesn’t exist.

Nitpicking aside, the problem with native browser widgets, in my opinion, are:

• tiny hit areas for desktop users
• no way to highlight certain dates (e.g., holidays) or mark dates ineligible for selection (e.g., future dates)
• no way to indicate the week of year (not an issue for most use cases)
• users don’t know how to un-select a date (you’d think the ‘clear’ button would give that away and you’d be wrong)
• the widget lets you enter invalid dates without telling the user (or the programmer, for that matter), e.g., 31 Sep.

Widgets where you need to click 3 times for a simple selection, as you mentioned, have one of two origin stories:

• They were designed ‘mobile first’ with screen sizes of 320×200px in mind and therefore put a premium on screen real estate.
• The “seeing many things is confusing” camp of designers got hold of them. The fact that my users fail to recognize the ‘clear’ button in the datepicker widget seems to agree with them, but it’s still annoying for people without ADHD.

Fall-through in switch/case. The perpetual anti-personnel mine.

Obligatory XKCD

I wish there were a free database of words to answer that question. :(

You store your code in the fridge? Does that keeps the bugs out?

As soon as you say, “I was looking for a library,” you’ve already indicated that you feel entitled to find a library somewhere rather than build it yourself

That interpretation is completely on you. Whenever one is writing code, it’s good practice to check if it hasn’t been written before. No-one needs to re-invent the wheel for the umpteenth time.

Do you not understand how that comes across as entitled?

No. This approach is literally taught at Uni. Don’t repeat work. That’s not only in programming. A chemist’s saying is “6 months in the lab can save you 2 hours in the library.” Blindly doing everything from scratch is just incredibly poor use of resources.

You’ll reject a GPL licensed library because it is copylefted and you know your management would never go for GPLing the entire work.

Yes. I don’t see how that’s a contentious point. I think I made my position clear in my last comment.

why do you expect there to just be some library you can use internally

That assumption is based on experience. The whole JavaScript ecosystem thrives on the idea of building stuff based on others’ work. It’s you, btw, that chose to interpret ‘looking for’ as ‘expecting to exist’. I never said that, nor did I mean it.

At some point the bugs are features.

Did you read the article I linked which explains what the :has selector does?

I’m glad that after 5-ish years of doing this shit professionally I finally know enough to help others! :D

The problem with #theme-toggle:checked ~body is that the selector is wrong. ~ requires that the second part comes after the first part in the HTML. But your toggle is inside the html and the body. [1]

Use the new-ish :has selector [2]:

html:has(#theme-toggle:checked) {
  background-color: #eff1f5;
}

[1] https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/CSS/Reference/Selectors/Subsequent-sibling_combinator
[2] https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/CSS/Reference/Selectors/:has

I’d like to humbly question the notion of “being able to implement a vision because you’re the department head”. Usually that just means more meetings.

None of the things in this picture makes sense. It’s a gold mine of Mildly Infuriating

If there’s a whole process about gathering resources, then I agree with you. I was talking about games like <Whatever> Tycoon, where the only resource is money and the only way to get it is to wait for it to accumulate.

You missed the point of my comment: There is always someone waiting. This isn’t cooperative. It’s a waiting game with turns.

For Project Zomboid that take is obviously stupid. But any builder where you’d share a bank account or otherwise a shared bank of resources gets a hard No from me, too. You’re always waiting for the bank account to fill up for the thing you want to build while the other person is throwing money away. Best-case scenario is you’re taking turns, with one person not doing much while the other builds.

If you want to play a game with friends, choose a game that you can actually play with friends, not one where you take turns playing a single-player game.

My opinion. Feel free to disagree.

Chinese restaurant? If Youtube comedians have taught be right then every portion larger than a spoonful is ‘idiot’ size.

It sounds more like you think you are entitled to have access to a library to begin with.

Could you point me to the part of my comment that led you to that conclusion?

Adding to this: The German word for the English monoculture (i.e., only one crop per field, but changing every growing season) is Reinkultur, or pure culture.