It has the return type declared to be double.

Every day pretty much with Unix tools. Vim, awk, sed, etc.

That’s what the If-Match header is for. It prevents this problem.

That being said, I generally think PUTs are preferable to PATCHes for simplicity.

It’s about making APIs more flexible, permissive, and harder to misuse by clients. It’s a user-centric approach to API design. It’s not done to make it easier on backend. If anything, it can take extra effort by backend developers.

But you’d clearly prefer vitriol to civil discourse and have no interest in actually learning anything, so I think my time would be better spent elsewhere.

As I already said, it’s very simple with JSON Patch:

[
  { *op": "replace", "path": "/Name™, "value": "otherName"}
]

Good practice in API design is to permissively accept either undefined or null to represent optionality with same semantics (except when using JSON Merge Patch, but JSON Patch linked above should be preferred anyway).

The semantics of the API contract is distinct from its implementation details (lazy loading).

Treating null and undefined as distinct is never a requirement for general-purpose API design. That is, there is always an alternative design that doesn’t rely on that misfeature.

As for patches, while it might be true that JSON Merge Patch assigns different semantics to null and undefined values, JSON Merge Patch is a worse version of JSON Patch, which doesn’t have that problem, because like I originally described, the semantics are explicit in the data structure itself. This is a transformation that you can always apply.

Zalando explicitly forbids it in their RESTful API Guidelines, and I would say their argument is a very good one.

Basically, if you want to provide more fine-grained semantics, use dedicated types for that purpose, rather than hoping every API consumer is going to faithfully adhere to the subtle distinctions you’ve created.

Only if using JSON merge patch, and that’s the only time it’s acceptable. But JSON patch should be preferred over JSON merge patch anyway.

Servers should accept both null and undefined for normal request bodies, and clients should treat both as the same in responses. API designers should not give each bespoke semantics.

Confused what you mean. OpenAPI has nothing to do with JS.

sigh

I’m so tired of repeating this ad nauseum. No, it’s not going to take your job. It’s hype train bullshit full of grifters. There is no intelligence or understanding, nor have we come anywhere close to achieving that. That is still entirely within the realm of science fiction.

Pretty dumb, honestly. If anything it just adds a Streisand effect to it as people try to figure out what’s censored.

Not that censoring it has any value whatsoever. Like if a child sees that, so fucking what?

Yeah it’s not all that uncommon in school, just increasingly uncommon in industry.

As someone that has recently taken an infant and and family CPR class for my son who started solid foods a few months ago, this is pretty similar to how they teach it today and I’m pretty sure it would have the same effect. You can’t perform a heimlich on a baby or very small child for a variety of reasons. This method or something similar to it is both safer and more effective, since it lets gravity help dislodge the food.

Visual… programming languages? Yikes.

If you mean for programming specifically, I… don’t, really. At most it would be for a quick sanity check on syntax in a language I don’t write often, for which Google is fine. But otherwise I rely on documentation and search features of the various language/tool-specific websites.

No, you divide work so that the majority of it can be done in isolation and in parallel. Testing components together, if necessary, is done on integration branches as needed (which you don’t rebase, of course). Branches and MRs should be small and short-lived with merges into master happening frequently. Collaboration largely occurs through developers frequently branching off a shared main branch that gets continuously updated.

Trunk-based development is the industry-standard practice at this point, and for good reason. It’s friendlier for CI/CD and devops, allows changes to be tested in isolation before merging, and so on.

Yeah, interoperability. Like every software implementation of natural numbers that include 0.

I just found out about this debate and it’s patently absurd. The ISO 80000-2 standard defines ℕ as including 0 and it’s foundational in basically all of mathematics and computer science. Excluding 0 is a fringe position and shouldn’t be taken seriously.

I’ve had snake. It’s pretty mediocre and tough.

Sure… That"s what libraries are for. No one hand-rolls that stuff. You can do all of that just fine (and, actually, in a lot less code, mostly because Java is so fucking verbose) without using the nightmare that is Spring.