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.
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).
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.
"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.
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
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.
