A few years ago I've built a more simple visualization similar to this one with the attacks on the host the application was already deployed: https://github.com/ludovicianul/geolog. China was mostly leading, but there were many from US and Europe.
Confidence can be achieved using https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mutation_testing. this involves running an engine that mutates your code and check if you have at least one assertion failing.
Java reached somehow parity with Go performance when using GraalVM and virtual threads. For a Java shop, this will minimize the appeal to move everything to Go as the gains are marginal.
As this targets developers, aren't developers supposed to be familiar with the terminal. So doing `chmod +x` is trivial. Especially since they probably use a lot of other tooling to build, package, deploy, etc.
Seriously. You want to ask the CTO to make artifacts public because you don't want devs to set or clear an attribute bit? Talk about entirely the wrong priorities.
Where did this coddled sense of entitlement come from? Are they creating their own SSH keys? Do they know the basics of the git cli? Or are these "magic commands" too? Do they know how to do their job?
I sympathise that Apple's tooling could be better, but the conclusion and tone is ridiculous given what could charitably be described as 'unique' requirements.
Our internal CLI tools have all largely been hassle free regardless of devs OS. We do use GoReleaser which abstracts away the multi arch builds, signing, and publishing to GitHub and Homebrew, which can be criticised sometimes as a bit of a crutch. But it's also been zero hassle for all of our Mac devs (the most junior of which are still expected to be able to download and execute a binary from a terminal.) and lets us get on with our day without prioritising 'requirements' that aren't even worth spending any time on.
Why would you even ship a command-line tool if your apparent need is to avoid the command line?
This wasn't a big refactor to be honest. It was just a recursion which ChatGPT suggested to be replaced with an iterative approach. This is why I've asked the question, as maybe I'm not setting the right context. I've provided regexes that were overflowing, etc.
