iLemming

18 ms·

271.
by iLemming 5mo ago
Yes, I'm puzzled as well. What exactly is weird - that we have a family? Or family and kids? Or that we need a way to communicate and group SMS is just too primitive and frustratingly annoying? Or that we don't use FB, WhatsApp or
272.
by iLemming 5mo ago
The US for the past 18 years. I'm honestly not sure why would it even sound surprising. Maybe because I said "channel" not "group chat". Just to be clear - this is a private group chat between our kids, my partner a
273.
by iLemming 5mo ago
What does country have to do with that? We just don't use whatsapp, instagram or facebook but still need a way to communicate. Unlike something like WeeChat, Telegram is pretty popular in both hemispheres.
274.
by iLemming 5mo ago
If you have kids or if you ever get kids, consider what I have done years ago. When my kids were in middle school (and I think I should have asked them to do that in elementary) I forced them to write a single or a couple of paragraphs abou
275.
by iLemming 5mo ago
These models starting to feel like Windows versions. Windows 95 was a promising start, but buggy. Windows ME was a disaster. Windows XP was good, but slightly buggy. Windows Vista was a bloated disaster. Windows 7 - refined, but still buggy
276.
by iLemming 5mo ago
It depends. If you're building an Emacs package or extending your own customizations, having "every buffer accessible" helps, because that way LLM is not dealing with Emacs (so to say), but with Emacs REPL, that has access to
277.
by iLemming 5mo ago
I'm not underrating static typing and I'm not saying static types have no value for refactoring - they absolutely do. But the "I can't refactor safely without types" argument tends to assume a codebase structured th
278.
by iLemming 5mo ago
We have a few backend services written in Clojure. We expose nrepl ports in our testing SDE k8s clusters. Our UI is all in Typescript, but I use nbb with Playwright - that gives me another REPL. LLM can poke through things in the UI REPL, w
279.
by iLemming 5mo ago
I can only share my empirical anecdata - I deal with code in different languages daily. Lisps have little difference when using with LLM just like any other compile&run language. But when you hook them up to a live Lisp REPL (which I ad
280.
by iLemming 5mo ago
When I say REPL, I specifically mean "Lisp REPL". Every step in Read.Eval.Print.Loop slightly differs in homoiconic languages like Clojure, CL, Fennel, Elisp, etc. Javascript and Ruby in that sense can only "benefit" if
281.
by iLemming 5mo ago
Yeah, most kids have no idea what it is like. Here's my longer comment further down in the thread. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48287062
282.
by iLemming 5mo ago
I bet you have not tested it with live Clojure REPL. When you give the LLM living, breathing REPL, it stops guessing and starts empirically analyzing current state of things and produces working solution faster, costing far less tokens. Thi
283.
by iLemming 5mo ago
It sounds almost squarely written by someone without practical experience of REPL-driven development. Specifically with Lisp REPLs. Sure, other languages also have REPLs, but if you dig just a bit deeper, you'd learn that every single
284.
by iLemming 5mo ago
Pfff... it's like my teenage daughter who's never driven a car brags to her friends how Mazda is better than Toyota, because "she switched". "Using Emacs" means actively reading, writing, evaluating Lisp code.
285.
by iLemming 5mo ago
What kind of argument is that? Java is 31, Python 35 years old, and Lisp is almost 70. They all still being used. Come on, let's find something real to talk about.
286.
by iLemming 5mo ago
Very cool. My immediate thought was - could this open possibilities to compete with Rust on wasm targets? Upon reviewing it more I realized - probably not. Jank (or any other Clojure dialect) wont' really be in position to beat Rust th
287.
by iLemming 5mo ago
That's beyond the point. We are all someone's father, son, etc. We all have things in life to deal with, priorities to reshuffle, bills to pay, worries to calm down. It simply is bullish and uncivilized to join a forum of professi
288.
by iLemming 5mo ago
> what the other parts are Of course I can't explain in detail in a single comment everything I listed, besides, that's just a subset of things I do through Emacs. Sometimes I want to kick off a process in the external terminal
289.
by iLemming 5mo ago
Now allow me to explain to you kindly, why you're fucking wrong here. You probably have no idea how difficult it is to write anything meaningful in English. Especially these days. For someone for whom English is not a second or even a
290.
by iLemming 5mo ago
You keep doubling down on your own perverted reality you composed out of thin air and somehow I have to apologize? Can you be I dunno, less emotional and more substantive? There's no controversy in what I wrote - it is pretty simple an
291.
by iLemming 5mo ago
We're not fighting, we're just "emotionally explaining things to one another". That's what my wife says to calm our dog, when he makes a concerned and scared face over a regular, non-confrontational conversation. Ju
292.
by iLemming 5mo ago
I know, right? You'd be like "using Emacs like a boss", going with your keyboard "frrrrrrrr" (well, no, that's not Emacs, Emacs would be like "C-c C-c C-c C-c C-x 8 and only then frrrr"), managing ent
293.
by iLemming 5mo ago
> Even more importantly, what happens to teamwork? I can concur with that thought direction. We used to pair and group-program on my team, we have a "Zoom office". Now it has become "let me take this ticket and feed it to
294.
by iLemming 5mo ago
> whole gestalt of what you do on a computer is now one big programmable surface Emacs-effect. Use it long enough and everything becomes "one big programmable surface". I've been in that modus operandi for years. Emacs is
295.
by iLemming 5mo ago
Yeah, sure analogies are... well... some made up shit we use, because we have imagination. And the imagination can take you for a spin. I just disagree with why Emacs heavy users are often "blamed" to be obsessed with their tools
296.
by iLemming 5mo ago
How often do you fish out a single word in a paragraph that has no semantic, emotional meaning to you personally and automatically flip the entire book, just because of one word? What I meant is that viewing Emacs merely as a means to achie
297.
by iLemming 5mo ago
> didn't own my data Ownership can have different forms. Slack.app that doesn't let me easily extract code snippets from a thread - owns me. Jira that forces me to use their imbecilic, quirky wysiwyg owns me. Note taking app th
298.
by iLemming 5mo ago
Like the cartoon character once said: "Yeah, sure, I mean, if you spend all day shuffling words around, you can make anything sound bad"... Re-read again what I wrote. Specifically about delusions. I can't believe I have to r
299.
by iLemming 5mo ago
Are you even reading what I wrote? What's with the childish tone, someone dropped your keyboard rate when you're a kid or something? Emacs is a tool, not a religion. There are plenty of talented, accomplished programmers who can r
300.
by iLemming 5mo ago
> I want my life to have as little maintenance as possible I honestly can't even relate to what that even means. I'm a programmer - my everyday job is all about changing the behavior of computer systems - local, remote, cloud,

More ›