5 ms·

This is Astro, not Astral. uv is Astral :-) Edit: OP clarified what they meant, I'm sorry for the misunderstanding on my part!

satvikpendem 9mo ago
They know, hence why they used e.g., i.e. exempli gratia
- woodruffw 9mo ago
  I don't think that's really clear. I think we could both defer to the OP clarifying. For pedantry's sake: neither i.e. nor e.g. would be correct here. You want cf. ("conferatur") to invite a comparison; e.g. is when an example pertains to an instance. In this case uv would not pertain to the instance, because Astro is not Astral.
  - 0xFF0123 9mo ago
    cf. would invite a fair bit of confusion on an article about cloudflare
    - woodruffw 9mo ago
      I agree! That's why I think it's probably just a confusion between entities. It doesn't make sense either as example or as a comparison (although IMO it makes more sense as the latter). (For the OP: I'm sorry if I misinterpreted you.)
      - arjie 9mo ago
        It's all good. Hardly matters. It was just becoming too big a discussion for something far too minor. Any frustration I had from being misunderstood (primarily self-directed) was alleviated from satvikpendem guessing correctly what I intended.
  - rdiddly 9mo ago
    "e.g." IS correct because uv is an example or instance of a dev tool.
    - scoot 9mo ago
      "e.g." isn't used correctly here. It's intended use is as a connector linking a clause to examples supporting that clause. You can't simply substitute "for example" with "e.g." anywhere in a sentence and expect it to function correctly. Regardless, these Latin abbreviations best avoided entirely due to the surprising number of readers who don't understand them.
- 725686 9mo ago
  For the perplex: e.g. is latin for "exempli gratia" = for example i.e. is latin for "id est" = that is
  - huhkerrf 9mo ago
    A good way to remember it is to use a backronym: e.g. - example given i.e. - in effect
    - programjames 9mo ago
      i.e. - in eother (words)
      - istjohn 9mo ago
        in explanation
  - spondyl 9mo ago
    As someone who was perplexed, I've only heard perplex used in past tense (I was perplexed) so seeing "For the perplex" just made me confused as to what "perplex" meant and I had to do a further search to decipher this tree of comments haha
    - 725686 9mo ago
      Ha, ha, sorry. English is not my native language.
- thayne 9mo ago
  I'm not sure. I wouldn't generally call Astro a "dev tool". It's more of a framework. It's possible you are right, but it isn't clear from the content of the comment.
  - Jenk 9mo ago
    Frameworks are a category of development tool. Things that developers utilitise to be productive.
    - badeeya 9mo ago
      Like coffee?
    - thayne 9mo ago
      IMO saying a framework is a dev tool is like saying a cake mix is a cooking tool, because it allows you to be more productive when making a cake. Sure, if you look at it a certain way, it is correct. But that isn't the way the term is usually used.
dvfjsdhgfv 9mo ago
It confused me as hell as my first thought was "oh great, astral.sh got bought by a large company, now we've eliminated the last obstacle to using uv in enterprise context" only to realize that it's another company with similar name. I mean good for them, but it would be nice if the same happened to e.g. Astral (cf.).

satvikpendem 9mo ago

They know, hence why they used e.g., i.e. exempli gratia

woodruffw 9mo ago
I don't think that's really clear. I think we could both defer to the OP clarifying. For pedantry's sake: neither i.e. nor e.g. would be correct here. You want cf. ("conferatur") to invite a comparison; e.g. is when an example pertains to an instance. In this case uv would not pertain to the instance, because Astro is not Astral.
- 0xFF0123 9mo ago
  cf. would invite a fair bit of confusion on an article about cloudflare
  - woodruffw 9mo ago
    I agree! That's why I think it's probably just a confusion between entities. It doesn't make sense either as example or as a comparison (although IMO it makes more sense as the latter). (For the OP: I'm sorry if I misinterpreted you.)
    - arjie 9mo ago
      It's all good. Hardly matters. It was just becoming too big a discussion for something far too minor. Any frustration I had from being misunderstood (primarily self-directed) was alleviated from satvikpendem guessing correctly what I intended.
- rdiddly 9mo ago
  "e.g." IS correct because uv is an example or instance of a dev tool.
  - scoot 9mo ago
    "e.g." isn't used correctly here. It's intended use is as a connector linking a clause to examples supporting that clause. You can't simply substitute "for example" with "e.g." anywhere in a sentence and expect it to function correctly. Regardless, these Latin abbreviations best avoided entirely due to the surprising number of readers who don't understand them.
725686 9mo ago
For the perplex: e.g. is latin for "exempli gratia" = for example i.e. is latin for "id est" = that is
- huhkerrf 9mo ago
  A good way to remember it is to use a backronym: e.g. - example given i.e. - in effect
  - programjames 9mo ago
    i.e. - in eother (words)
    - istjohn 9mo ago
      in explanation
- spondyl 9mo ago
  As someone who was perplexed, I've only heard perplex used in past tense (I was perplexed) so seeing "For the perplex" just made me confused as to what "perplex" meant and I had to do a further search to decipher this tree of comments haha
  - 725686 9mo ago
    Ha, ha, sorry. English is not my native language.
thayne 9mo ago
I'm not sure. I wouldn't generally call Astro a "dev tool". It's more of a framework. It's possible you are right, but it isn't clear from the content of the comment.
- Jenk 9mo ago
  Frameworks are a category of development tool. Things that developers utilitise to be productive.
  - badeeya 9mo ago
    Like coffee?
  - thayne 9mo ago
    IMO saying a framework is a dev tool is like saying a cake mix is a cooking tool, because it allows you to be more productive when making a cake. Sure, if you look at it a certain way, it is correct. But that isn't the way the term is usually used.

dvfjsdhgfv 9mo ago

It confused me as hell as my first thought was "oh great, astral.sh got bought by a large company, now we've eliminated the last obstacle to using uv in enterprise context" only to realize that it's another company with similar name. I mean good for them, but it would be nice if the same happened to e.g. Astral (cf.).