earcar

4 ms·

1.
RubyLLM 2.0: What's New(rubyllm.com)
4 points by earcar 7d ago|0 comments
2.
by earcar 25d ago
I prioritized shipping over carefully crafting docs. I thought nobody would read them and they'd rather enjoy the software. I was wrong. I'll rewrite them.
3.
by earcar 25d ago
Author here. I haven't seen any evidence of Spotify killing librespot. To me the project looks active and works totally fine. I don't have a new Spotify account to verify the claim above. I suspect wilted-iris is conflating it wit
4.
by earcar 25d ago
Author here. Yes, the code is generated. Yes, the docs are generated. I agree LLM copy is annoying and will rewrite them myself. But I built this for myself out of frustration with the official client, and I use it every day, so every bug I
5.
by earcar 25d ago
Author here. Two reasons I chose an immediate mode UI framework: 1. Latency. A click paints on the next frame, because it sidesteps the stages of a retained mode UI: there's no dirty-marking, no layout and paint passes scheduled for la
6.
by earcar 25d ago
Thanks for the link, I responded there: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49519723
7.
by earcar 25d ago
No. The "Star" button is a simple link to the repo.
8.
by earcar 25d ago
No. The "Star" button on the website is a simple link to the repo.
9.
by earcar 25d ago
Author here. Happy to answer any questions!
10.
Show HN: Fastpotify – a fast, native Spotify client in Rust and egui(github.com)
1 points by earcar 29d ago|1 comments
11.
ArchSpec: Executable Architecture Specification for Ruby's Agentic Coding Era(paolino.me)
2 points by earcar 1mo ago|0 comments
12.
Show HN: ArchSpec – Static architecture linter for Ruby(archspecrb.dev)
4 points by earcar 1mo ago|0 comments
13.
Solid Queue 1.6.0 now supports fiber workers(github.com)
104 points by earcar 2mo ago|39 comments
14.
Making the Rails Default Job Queue Fiber-Based(paolino.me)
2 points by earcar 2mo ago|1 comments
15.
by earcar 2mo ago
Author here. I opened the Solid Queue fiber-worker PR because I needed Rails background jobs to handle long-running LLM streams without allocating a worker thread per conversation. The implementation shipped today in Solid Queue 1.6.0. It u
16.
by earcar 3mo ago
Thanks for litigating every layer of a bug I fixed 27 minutes after your comment, more than a year ago. > Also, the same PR was reverted a bit later, IIRC No. Your #151 was merged. The regressions it introduced were patched the next day
17.
by earcar 3mo ago
We have an extensive model registry with cost and capability tracking: https://rubyllm.com/available-models/
18.
by earcar 3mo ago
Your PR #151 was opened May 4, 2025 and merged 2 days later. The repeated `chat.to_llm` message bug was reported Apr 30 2025, and fixed May 6, 2025, about 27 minutes after your comment. It only showed up when reusing the same Rails chat obj
19.
by earcar 3mo ago
I checked whether you or anyone from Wistia, your company, opened PRs. I found one: #813, opened June 16, 2026. Last week.
20.
by earcar 3mo ago
Thank you! Since a few mentioned Responses API: the reason why it wasn't implemented in 1.x is because RubyLLM 1.x effectively assumes a 1:1 mapping between provider and protocol. That assumption no longer holds since OpenAI has 2 prot
21.
by earcar 3mo ago
Interesting! What were you guys trying to achieve by running them in your own tool harness?
22.
by earcar 3mo ago
Glad you like it. Rails-style instrumentation landed in 1.16.0. https://rubyllm.com/instrumentation/
23.
by earcar 3mo ago
Not yet. I'll do a series of blog posts and tweets in the next weeks.
24.
by earcar 3mo ago
Thank you! I love how MINASWAN Hacker News is when talking about Ruby!
25.
by earcar 3mo ago
Thank you! Responses API is now implemented and it's coming in RubyLLM 2.0 https://github.com/crmne/ruby_llm/blob/main/lib/ruby_llm/pro...
26.
by earcar 3mo ago
RubyLLM author here. I'm not sure where you got that. `chat.with_temperature(0.2)` https://rubyllm.com/chat/#controlling-response-behavior `chat.with_thinking(effort: :high, budget: 8000)` https://rubyl
27.
by earcar 3mo ago
I have founded a UG and upgraded to a GmbH before. It had got us "more credibility" with our clients, and 12,500EUR less in each other's bank accounts. Thanks for your insults.
28.
by earcar 3mo ago
Can't agree with you more.
29.
by earcar 3mo ago
It should be possible to move within Europe, then when the liquidity event happens tax me from the countries where I've lived, proportionally to the time I've lived there. If you want to move out of Europe, you get the exit tax as
30.
by earcar 3mo ago
I'm not 100% sure, but I believe there was an issue with the "place of effective management" or perhaps the company address not being in your federal state.

More ›