iLemming

51 ms·

721.
by iLemming 1y ago
Oh boy, I was such a jetbrains kiddo, I can't even tell you. I had posters on my wall with keybinding and commands cheat sheets, I knew people working for JetBrains by their names, I talked to them regularly, it almost felt like we wer
722.
by iLemming 1y ago
> Maintaining an emacs config has always been quite annoying I dunno, I feel it stopped being like that for me long ago. Perhaps I'm just a "tinkerer" and maybe I never even minded improving my setup. But like I said, at s
723.
by iLemming 1y ago
> is needlessly condescending. While this may sound condesending, I believe it's understandable where the snub is coming from. VSCode doesn't need evangelism - it has become the de facto standard that every programmer is expect
724.
by iLemming 1y ago
You don't "switch" from gptel as this package solves a problem of a different dimension. Gptel is still great for tons of other things, even though it's not suitable for "project context-wise" LLM workflows.
725.
by iLemming 1y ago
> Should I be learning how to debug elisp better to understand how the commands interact with my environment? Hell yeah, you should. I just don't understand how the heck people would claim to be using Emacs for decades and still not
726.
by iLemming 1y ago
> vim and emacs could potentially have a huge advantage. They always have had. It just depends on what people perceive to be advantageous. For me, VSCode's and IntelliJ's closed model for extensibility is a huge downside. By &q
727.
by iLemming 1y ago
gptel supports all sorts of models, including localized ones.
728.
by iLemming 1y ago
> the vim joke being that it lacks a good editor That joke was dumb from the beginning and has fallen into complete irrelevance years ago - Emacs actually can and does vim better than Vim, GVim, and Neovim, or any vim plugins for other I
729.
by iLemming 1y ago
> which can also display images Not only that - it supports PDFs (I annotate the books and papers in it), SVGs, variable fonts, emojis, even spreadsheets - yup, you can do Excel-like calculations; there are built-in browsers, etc. Beside
730.
by iLemming 1y ago
> Emacs doesn't have a lot of the tooling of something more modern Define "more modern"? Language servers, Git integration, refactoring tools, debugging? Emacs has all of those. Sure, VSCode and IntelliJ give you this stuf
731.
by iLemming 1y ago
Emacs arguably is the only one of the true meaning of "Integrated Development Environment" perhaps more thoroughly than any other editor. When we break down what IDE really means - integrated, development, and environment - Emacs
732.
by iLemming 1y ago
> generate better code in typed, procedural languages Better in what sense? I've been using Anthropic models to write in different Lisps - Fennel, Clojure, Emacs Lisp, and they do perform a decent job. I can't always blindly co
733.
by iLemming 1y ago
> Excel is one of the most successful pieces of software of all time, so it's an odd choice for a punching bag. So is Photoshop and Google Maps - the point of the article isn't bashing on Excel, it's about choosing the wro
734.
by iLemming 1y ago
You seem to have been frustrated with prescriptive programming advice and language evangelism, which is understandable. Yet it looks like you're conflating Hickey's design philosophy with language zealotry. The talk's core me
735.
by iLemming 1y ago
> eventually gave up because -- well, Lisp, right? That would be an utterly misguided approach. Lisp is amazing, you just need to give it a chance to be appreciated. Accept it with all its flaws and immense power, surrender to the mallea
736.
by iLemming 1y ago
You seem to be making several interconnected points, but your writing style is making it somewhat difficult to follow. It looks like you're mischaracterizing Hickey's talk. The distinction between "simple" (not intertwin
737.
by iLemming 1y ago
I'm not sure what you're saying, but just in case if you're implying that choosing to use something like Clojure or Elixir adds "unnecessary layer of problems" just because they are not statically typed, let me remi
738.
by iLemming 1y ago
Spec and Malli in Clojure feel like effing magic - so expressive, so simple - "data as code" philosophy means validations schemas are first-class citizens that can be manipulated, stored, transmitted, and reasoned about like any o
739.
by iLemming 1y ago
I can't hit reply on the top level comment anymore (it's flagged and now is 'dead'). I just wanted to say that is a text-book example case of how to tell the world "I am a dilettante in my field". Experienced p
740.
by iLemming 1y ago
I do know and like F#, and just like the other commenter I think I personally prefer it over some Haskell's ways. F# was my first FP language, I was so excited about it, but it was a hard sell back then to my team of charpers, so I sne
741.
by iLemming 1y ago
Exactly this. When speaking about static or dynamic type systems, you can't discuss them in isolation, you need to specify because the holistic experience of types in JS, Python, Clojure, Elixir, Haskell, Rust, etc. will differ, someti
742.
by iLemming 1y ago
> specifically engendered by Python trauma Well, yes, Python can sure feel pretty fucking awkward from both perspectives. It started as fully dynamic, then added type hints, but that's not the main problem with it, in my opinion, th
743.
by iLemming 1y ago
> that multiplies files by 9, or that subtracts squids from apricots I don't understand why when someone mentions the word "dynamic", programmers automatically think javascript, php, bash or awk. Some dynamically typed PLs
744.
by iLemming 1y ago
> Over time you will probably feel drawn to both, for different reasons I agree 100%. At first I liked C# and Java types, but then I moved to Python and I was happy. Learning some Typescript pulled me back into the static typing camp, ye
745.
by iLemming 1y ago
Sure you're right on most of this, but allow me a slight pushback here. I am sorry, I am inclined to use Clojure/Lisp in my examples, but only because of its recency in my toolbelt, I could probably come up with similar Elexir exa
746.
by iLemming 1y ago
You act as if I said anything about anyone's experience. "they prefer static types" can mean a whole lot of things - there's type inference, soundness, turing-completeness, type classes, GADTs, higher-kinded types, depen
747.
by iLemming 1y ago
> Maybe I'm just wrong Yes you are. First of all there isn't such a thing as "strict typing", types are either static/dynamic and/or strong/weak. I suppose you meant Elixir has no static types. It is ho
748.
by iLemming 1y ago
> smalltalk and common lisp don't qualify as popular languages. Sure, Smalltalk isn't, but Lisp is a different story. In this context I assume we all mean to say "Lisp" and not "Common Lisp" specifically. L
749.
by iLemming 1y ago
> Am I the only person No, you're not alone. After learning Lisp, structural editing and REPL-driven-development, I just don't feel like needing to learn new languages no matter how powerful they seem to be. Lisps like Clojure
750.
by iLemming 1y ago
> i am interested in clojure, but i am put off by it using the java run time Clojure runs not only on Java - you have Clojurescript, you have babashka and nbb, you have Clojure-Dart — if interested in building Flutter apps, you can even

More ›