Helix is “it just works” but it actually does, without having to get lost in the (config) sauce.
It’ll be unstoppable once they finalize and ship the plugin system.
Edit: and I haven’t even mentioned the descriptions above commands, the command palette-like functionality in <Space-, nor the tutor yet. It’s just so much more beginner-friendly.
The Unix principle of piping between two or even multiple programs, together with “all data should be in the simplest common format possible” (that is, largely unformatted strings), was a really clever invention to be popularized. As proven by the fact it is still so useful decades later on a myriad of computers unimaginably more powerful than what they had back then.
It’s not perfect by any means (alternative title: why something like Nushell exists), but it’s pretty good all things considered I dare say.
- Traffic
- Remote (app) features
- Music
protein folding
We’re at the point where, due to how b2c tech services work, I think a lot of people think AI === LLM
I’d rather take a compile step than having no type safety in JS, even as a user.
Yeah I realize that. My go-to comparison would be PDF. Where Firefox has PDF.js (I think?), Chromium just… implements basically seemingly the entire (exhaustive!) standard.
Thanks for these explanations, that makes a lot more sense now. I didn’t even think to consider browsers might be using something else than an off-the-shelf implementation for image/other file formats…, lol
Honest question, since I have no clue about web/browser engines other than being able to maybe name 4-5 of them (Ladybird, Servo, Webkit, Gecko, … shit, what was Chromium’s called again?):
What makes browsers/browser engines so difficult that they need millions upon millions of LOC?
Naively thinking, it’s “just” XML + CSS + JS, right? (Edit: and then the networking stack/hyperlinks)
So what am I missing? (Since I’m obviously either forgetting something and/or underestimating how difficult engines for the aforementioned three are to build…)
Damn. Thanks for the link!
Ooh, you’re totally right!! I forgot about that since it’s not in the older versions.
set -euo pipefail
Fun fact, if you’re forced to write against POSIX shell, you aren’t allowed to use these options, since they’re not a thing, which is (part of) the reason why for example Google doesn’t allow any shell language but bash, lol.
Then you’ll have to find the time later when this leads to bugs. If you write against bash while declaring it POSIX shell, but then a random system’s sh doesn’t implement a certain thing, you’ll be SOL. Or what exactly do you mean by “match standards”?
Well yeah, with CSS and user interaction it’s understandable… as I’ve linked above.
The question was if this is possible for purely-HTML markup descriptions without CSS nor clicks, and it was a rhetorical one.
So where in that can I encode an arbitrary program? Like one could do in JavaScript?
Who is “it” which interprets things? Is it part of HTML/CSS?
Boy have we got the API for you!
Replace all spaces with the unicode non-breaking space that looks the same.
Although I know at least some language servers will detect this and mark it as an error, lol.
Hm, really? Curios, because it most definitely is quite fast for me… May I ask (very approximately) what region you’re living in? Maybe they lack a data center “nearby”?
To be honest, I think I prefer the Emacs one due to how absurd it is: https://youtu.be/urcL86UpqZc
But all of them are hilarious.