I think that is how the smarter agents do things? Just like Claude/ChatGPT sometimes does a web search they can do other tool calls instead of just making a statistical guess. Of course it doesn’t always make the bright choice between those options though…
I thought courts martial and secretaries general (and Knights Templar/Hospitaller, et al) were Anglo-Norman/French borrowings. Do you have any examples of native English phrases following that pattern?
There are plenty of unvaccinated people this side of the border and it seems to be a growing trend. If the government is going to intern people in close quarters then they should probably make sure to vaccinate them. I would not be optimistic about the level of medical care sick patients will have access to in this scenario.
To preserve backwards compatibility and not require all those old sites to update, the legacy behavior would have to be the default, with opt-in for the new behavior.
I seem to recall a scene from the book where a man is smoking a cigar in an office and prints out his computer output rather than reading from a screen. It was delightfully retrofuturist (or whatever the opposite of anachronistic is).
The problem is other people/teams making PRs to your code that you then have to maintain or fix later. It’s in your interest not to half-ass the review, creating an asymmetric amount of work for you vs them.
What is the use case? It’s hard for me to think of a reason you’d want to wrap a link in a button.
If you want to navigate, use an anchor.
If you want to trigger JS logic, use a button with onclick handler.
If you want to navigate while doing some side effect like an API call, use an anchor with onclick handler (and don’t prevent default).
Hey, leave us humanities majors out of it. Most of us have studied critical thinking skills and ethics, which could have easily been used to avoid the various geopolitical messes we’re in right now.
The Stack Exchange link is incorrect about -ite being etymologically derived from lithos, as one of the commenters there noted. Maybe a misunderstanding of this wiktionary note or similar:
> But by the Hellenistic period, both the masculine -ίτης (-ítēs) and the feminine -ῖτις (-îtis) became very productive in forming technical terms for products, diseases, minerals and gems (adjectives with elliptic λίθος (líthos, “stone”)), ethnic designations and Biblical tribal names.
The meaning of that is not that -ite is etymologically derived from lithos. It’s trying to say that mineral names like “hematite” (αἱματίτης - literally “blood-red”) are originally adjectives agreeing with an implied noun lithos.