I am listening to the PHP is dead debate for roughly 16 years now :D let me just point out that COBOL still exists and is in use. we can start having this debate in 30+ years again when they probably hire me back from my pension to fix some old weird PHP code. The language reached critical mass a long time ago it will take a long time till it declines that's just the reality of economics for now.

obliterating? you know that basically means that they are 'destroying' your expectation and not that they are 'giving you more than you expected' exceeding? maybe? doesn't sound so fancy but at least the headline does not contradict the content.

just learn reading regex. that one is quite easy and it's a wrong email validation based on the rfcs.

the joke in the picture was already there in 2007 when I learned vim https://i.imgur.com/M5wl14r.png also don't forget :%s/<pattern_to_search>/<pattern_to_replace/g or :nerdTree if you ever find out how to install plugins ;D :syntax on one of the big advantages of vim is it uses cursor streams for file reads which means :D you can actually open very large files. besides that for my normal development life outside the realm of SSH. I prefer intellij ;D ... maybe vscode or sublime if it's just a small 'hacky' thing. btw ... did you try emacs gg ? maybe you want some lisp power at your disposal? ;D and what also fun if you can use vim and emacs(lisp) ... you can instantly provoke oldschool flame wars in the OPs / Systemprogrammer scene ;D.

Human Multitasking to me, only works if the tasks are not complex and don't need complex analysis but mainly execution. I can fold my laundry and talk basically. I can write a simple HTML form and switch between an email and talking to a colleague. These are things that I trained a lot there is no learning involved just acting on a subconscious level. Any multitasking within a creative process that is not already broken down to smaller pieces that have well defined boundaries seams counterproductive to me. that's my experience.

I am oldschool so I got my own infrastructure. not really hard to do and with a bit of configuration it's possible to keep it safe and maintainable. And I can run my own virtual clusters in the background. lxc, kvm, rkt etc to the rescue so to speak. but .... well you can say one of my side-projects is my infrastructure. If you're not interested in the overhead it provides (which I do understand not everyone really wants to know everything - like I do). aka: I don't know maybe you can also access free shared hosting services ;D ....

based on this definition php, python, perl are also compiled languages. actually every language that has a VM is compiled. I know the definition changed over the years, but the reason those languages are not considered 'compiled' is the preprocessing/optimization step not the transformation itself. But ofc we could argue esp since graal in Java now supports compiled javascript to java-vm code and other things. also since ES6 gets 'transpiled' it gets fuzzy quick. still it remains an interpreted language with JIT qualities to me.

this is not like java. const team = { partnerOne: `Team1` , partnerTwo: `Team2` , myFunction: function sayTeamNames ( ) { console .log( ` ${this.partnerOne} and ${this.partnerTwo} ` ); } } you need to use this in javascript. Javascript originally was built in a lisp syntax. that's the reason why it has so many functional (as in functional programming) properties. if you want the access a property you need to define the access of the right memory segment. (Programming languages are usually represented as stack-machines and those stack-machines usually have memory segments). Memory segments basically are just labels that define how to access the memory. in java and c# the programming languages basically resolves hierarchical over the scopes -> local, param, this ..... so you can write it like ... myFunction: function sayTeamNames ( ) { console .log( ` ${partnerOne} and ${partnerTwo} ` ); } ... because after it looked local myFunction: function sayTeamNames ( ) { let partnerOne = 'blub' ; let partnerTwo = 'bleh' ; console .log( ` ${partnerOne} and ${partnerTwo} ` ); } it would try to look at the params myFunction: function sayTeamNames ( partnerOne, partnerTwo ) { console .log( ` ${partnerOne} and ${partnerTwo} ` ); } and than resolve to the virtual-memory-segment to itself 'this' const team = { partnerOne: `Team1` , partnerTwo: `Team2` , myFunction: function sayTeamNames ( ) { console .log( ` ${partnerOne} and ${partnerTwo} ` ); } } but in js the 'this' segment/pointer/reference is passed via auto currying. const team = { .... myFunction: function sayTeamNames ( ) { console .log( ` ${partnerOne} and ${partnerTwo} ` ); }.bind( this ) // this is done magically in the background ... } because the original language concept looked more like https://www.gnu.org/software/emacs/manual/html_node/elisp/Calling-Functions.html But that leads to far. it's just an explanation for the lateron 'funny' difference between class x { Z = 'test' ; y () { const subfunction = function ( x ) { console .log( this .z); //<- won't work since every function that is created in this way will allways bind 'itself' (in JS every function is an object) } } } class x { Z = 'test' ; y () { const sub function = ( x ) => { console .log( this .z); //<- will work since the short function definition always does "autobind" the parent scope (this refers to subfunction which refers to x) } } } class x { Z = 'test' ; y () { const subfunction = function ( x ) { console .log( this .z); //<- will work since you 'bound' / curried 'this' from the parent context as the own 'this' }.bind( this ); } } There are also JIT differences of behaviour in JS between function and const -> the less 'this' the less complex state the more optimizations can be done automatically. But this would lead to far. The main point is. in Javascript, in the current state, you need to write this to access the object context. At least that's how I understand the language / behaviour. But I have to be honest maybe I overly simplified things.

you need to define networks and connect them to each other: as an example services: app: container_name: "app-fpm" build: context: ./app volumes: - ./ data /mysql/:/ var /lib/mysql/ - ./ data /run/mysqld:/run/mysqld - ./ data /run/php:/run/php/ - ./ data /run/clamd:/ var /run/clamd/ - ./ data /tmp:/tmp - ./app/php/fpm/php.ini:/etc/php/ 7.2 /fpm/php.ini - ./app/app-entrypoint.sh:/app-entrypoint.sh links: - "mongodb:mongodb" - "memcached:memcached" networks: - dbnet depends_on: - web - mariadb - mongodb - memcached mariadb: container_name: "app-mysql" build: context: mariadb image: mariadb:tag volumes: - ./mariadb/my.cnf:/etc/mysql/my.cnf - ./ data /mysql/ data :/ var /lib/mysql - ./ data /run/mysqld:/run/mysqld - ./mariadb/app-entrypoint.sh:/app-entrypoint.sh ports: - "53306:3306" networks: - dbnet https://docs.docker.com/compose/networking/

I feel you. I had similar problems with companies I founded. gg actually I am waiting for one to succeed ;D ... Esp the thing with the partner I can relate to. I started my first company with a friend. He did not betray me, but we started out without clarifying responsibilities and ownership. So after a while the pressure started building up between us. The way we perceived how we should do things diverged more and more. No one was allowed to decide instead we started basically bitching around and than monetary stress hits us as well. lets just say g not one of my favorite times to remember, although a lot of good things happened as well in other aspects of my life. It took us like ~5 years to normalize our relationship. I consider him still one of my closest friends. gG didn't change the fact that for a while I wanted to hit him as soon as I heard his voice ;D .... I don't know if it was something similar with you. But I understand the general notion of starting out with friends and ending up in a bad place. However I think it's great that you got your house :D! And take care of yourself! ;D