PAEz

I'm not a regular poster here, but I've been watching LTT and GN videos for many years. I just wanted to leave my feelings and feedback, to add my single opinion to hopefully help LTT be better.
 
- I have been watching less and less LTT videos over the past few years as I feel the quality of videos has dropped. A lot of what is in the GN video backs this up
 
- The clickbait videos titles and thumbnails have contributed to this (I won't click a video without knowing the content), as well as the constant intrusive plugs for the merchandise.
 
- I am a fan of GN, but if he didn't contact LTT first for comment, which appears to be the case, that is wrong and very disappointing
 
- The whole Billet Labs debacle is unacceptable at every level. There wasn't just one error here, there is a whole series of errors which unbelievably ends in a prototype being sold. This is negligence and the blasé response from LTT to this is a disgrace, "we're not going to review our SOPs" is a terrible response, obviously something needs to change as this series of errors is ridiculous.
 
- The Pwnage Mouse thing seems to he getting lost in all this too. The way LTT handled this is an embarrassment, unprofessional and amateur.
 
LTT need to learn lesson from this and make changes. I want to trust the videos again like I did 5+ years ago. Slow the content, improve quality and make the videos accurate and useful over being "funny" (I don't think the sensor humour on LTT videos is funny, it's mildly amusing at best and cringeworthy on occasion, but that's on me).
 
Put your community first and make some positive changes. Start by slowing down a bit and putting out better, less frequent content.
 
That's just my opinion. Cheers.
 

Here's a stackoverflow answer to that question.....
https://stackoverflow.com/questions/23985018/simple-css-animation-loop-fading-in-out-loading-text
...its always nice to see it doing what you wanted, so I copied one of the examples and changed it to an image....
http://plnkr.co/edit/l2GoxgobXTtxSZe5otxX?p=preview
 
https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/CSS/CSS_Animations

just a quick note, just because discord is written in JS doesn't mean the JS library is any more or less valid than the python library.  The actual discord bot API is a REST api, so any framework on top of that is a technically just an API wrapper library, including the JS one. It's not more native to discord for bot making than python is, since they are all just fancy delegates to network requests to the REST api.
 
I would say discord.js has more users, and it seems to be the most popular discord bot lib out there at the moment, but discord.py is also perfectly viable.

Use Celeron. Then other users will be happy that your programs work fast.

Forgive me for thinking these were 2 completely different things:
((Entity*)&hero)->set_attack(5); Entity(hero).set_attack(5); I know better now. Although my compiler produces 2 completely different results. I guess I should compile without the -pedantic flag.

The idea that you cant do something in a particular language is usually wrong.
C# is perfectly capable at getting those specs.
OpenHardwareMonitor
https://openhardwaremonitor.org/
https://github.com/openhardwaremonitor/openhardwaremonitor
Complete hardware monitoring app written in C#.
https://www.codeproject.com/Articles/1115618/CPU-Temperature-System-Information
Project written in C# using the dll from OpenHadwareMonitor.  Could be a good place for you to start.
 
Use what ever language you like the look of.  C, C++, C#, Delphi (so nice to hear its still being used;), JS, woteva could all get the job done.
I avoided all Cs when I first started coz I couldnt handle the look of the code, all those squiggles and wotnot put me off, so I went with pascal/delphi.  But then my bad memory stopped me from getting my head around all the oop stuff, never stopped me from making LOTS of utils for myself tho.  Now I ONLY do JS coz it was nice and simple for my bad memory (no enforced systems helped me alot).  Now JS is getting a lot more to it but my ground knowledge is so complete now its not proving a problem.  Seriously, just pick what ever you feel comfortable with they all have their plus and minus and once you learn one learning another isnt that bad, they all kinda relate.

let element = document.querySelector("#add-to-cart[data-id='1']" This will select the element you described.
The #add-to-cart will select an element with the ID of add-to-cart and the [data-id='1'] says with an attribute of data-id that equals "1".
 
https://www.w3.org/TR/selectors-3/
https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/Document/querySelector
https://jsfiddle.net/yrdzbhaf/
 
EDIT: OH, and if you have more than one element with an id of add-to-cart then that should really be a class.  ID is meant to identify a single element, otherwise it should be a class.  So more correct would be a class of add-to-cart and then use the ID to distinguish which one.

let element = document.querySelector("#add-to-cart[data-id='1']" This will select the element you described.
The #add-to-cart will select an element with the ID of add-to-cart and the [data-id='1'] says with an attribute of data-id that equals "1".
 
https://www.w3.org/TR/selectors-3/
https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/Document/querySelector
https://jsfiddle.net/yrdzbhaf/
 
EDIT: OH, and if you have more than one element with an id of add-to-cart then that should really be a class.  ID is meant to identify a single element, otherwise it should be a class.  So more correct would be a class of add-to-cart and then use the ID to distinguish which one.

Nothing wrong with Pascal. It's a solid language to learn the basics of coding and it still has a number of applications (science, along with FORTRAN, for example) its used in

There's soooooo many things that do this.  Not saying dont do it, hell no its a fantastic exercise and I learnt alot making a thingy like this once.  But just saying. 
Every time you see JSX it gets converted to something like this and many other things have this approach minus the jsx. 
One great example to look at is Mithril.....
https://mithril.js.org/#hello-world
...I picked Mithril because its great and most its docs show the none JSX versions but there is a jsx transpiler if you want to look at it.

This answers are exactly what I wanted, thank you.

People don't really realise there isnt a better option, if youtube doesnt do this hollywood and the music industry will either setup external systems for automatiicaly suing people, or drive google to shut youtube down.
This also has nothing to do with what i said.

Your test on that test site is flawed, you should have declared the array.prototype function in the setup.  Right now its doing it ever test which will slow it down alot. And pre declaring the function and not as an argument can speed things up a bit aswell.
http://jsben.ch/3H35T

 
(function() { // Generate the test array with random strings let arr = []; for (let i = 0; i < 100000; i++) { arr[i] = Math.random().toString(36).substring(2, 3 + Math.floor(Math.random() * 9)); } Array.prototype.loop = function(func) { let l = this.length; for (let i = 0; i < l; i++) { func(this[i]); } } const add = (x)=>o += x; let o = ''; var loop; console.time(loop = 'Loop - for -') for (let i of arr) { add(i); } console.timeEnd(loop); o = ''; console.time(loop = 'Loop - prototype -') arr.loop(add); console.timeEnd(loop); // console.log(o) console.log('Array length', arr.length); } )(); One browser is faster at one and the other the other...hehe, this is the point where people tell you that micro benchimarking is a fools game and most of the time its just best to write code thats easiest to read, debug, test, blah, blah.  And most of the time they're right.

If your using a modern browser you could also have used 'includes'....
 
if(mois[i].includes('r')) https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/JavaScript/Reference/Global_Objects/String/includes