troupo

16 ms·

421.
by troupo 5mo ago
> You can migrate CSS to Sass to CSS modules to Emotion CSS to etc mostly just by copying them over, because all of those are CSS (with some quirks). Tailwind classes are non-transferable Tailwind classes are literally vanilla CSS class
422.
by troupo 5mo ago
> but "give a name to a re-usable set of styles for a component" is pretty much as fundamental as you can get. Yes. And as 30 years of CSS show, it's not enough. > Sure, sure. except for the inline styles everywhere. An
423.
by troupo 5mo ago
> The HTML spec says divs are the element of last resort. This issue isn’t that they’re bad. The issue is they are reached for far too quickly. The problem is that HTML gives us very few tools to do anything useful. And you can only push
424.
by troupo 5mo ago
True! And Mozilla is one of the good guys. What I should've said in my hastily written comment should have been: "and other implementations of the same (or other) functionality isn't divs and spans?" I think my only true
425.
by troupo 5mo ago
> With LLMs I think this upside is much smaller now though. With LLMs Tailwind wins. Because it's a very restricted set of classes. With regular "separation of concerns" CSS, LLMs will happily just pile on more and more an
426.
by troupo 5mo ago
There are different types of separation of concerns :) https://x.com/simonswiss/status/1664736786671869952
427.
by troupo 5mo ago
> HTML is marking up the meaning of the document. You should start there. Then style with CSS. If you need extra elements for styling at that point, you might use a div or span (but you should ask yourself if there's something bette
428.
by troupo 5mo ago
> I have nothing to hide. The metrics speak for themselves. What metrics? Where are the amazing new projects and features you built? Where are the amazing products and features you built that are better than existing ones (run faster,
429.
by troupo 5mo ago
I can also claim a bunch of things. If you manage to read the comment I was originally replying to, and my reply: --- start quote --- - Just what kind of evidence do you suppose they could have? - Showing actual improved products and featur
430.
by troupo 5mo ago
> My answer to "show your work" was "No." I am not going to go through my code An interesting answer to literally "Just what kind of evidence do you suppose they could have? - Showing actual improved products and
431.
by troupo 5mo ago
> I generally check out their profile, first thing. Not everyone is you. E.g. I don't expect he answer to "show your work" be no answer and "why didn't you check my profile".
432.
by troupo 6mo ago
> It’s not been a cakewalk. I’ve needed to toss out large swaths of LLM-generated code, and rewrite by hand, but, for the most part, it’s been a huge help. Same here :) > not some AI cabal. There are enough enthusiasts to make it feel
433.
by troupo 6mo ago
Showing actual improved products and features. Showing actual code. etc.
434.
by troupo 6mo ago
I probably won't. Everyone is busy discussing how amazing is this collection of markdown files for Claude... which Claude is known to randomly ignore. And it's generally known that LLMs "hallucinate" court cases and quot
435.
by troupo 6mo ago
grep with regexp misses any and all context. Especially in large codebases (and if terms are somewhat generic like "account", which can find hundreds of functions). So, on small codebases it misses "small" things like &q
436.
by troupo 6mo ago
-2 points at the time you wrote this comment :)
437.
by troupo 6mo ago
> So it is optimized for the general case, using robust tooling that works everywhere Where "robust tooling" is "grep with various regexes while completely missing the big picture even in small codebases"
438.
by troupo 6mo ago
> As a lawyer, I'm excited about this, As in "I'm excited to win a lot of money dismantling hallucinated quotations and invalid assumptions"?
439.
by troupo 6mo ago
Significantly fewer people would pay for objective reporting than for, say, Fox News. Partly because Fox News would be much cheaper.
440.
by troupo 6mo ago
Most Latin-based scripts are just as unambiguous ;)
441.
by troupo 6mo ago
> Eh, somewhat reductive thinking. Demand for renewables causes an increase in the build out of new renewables. Yea, it's not instant, but that's how markets work. Funny how this line of thinking is indistinguishable from crypt
442.
by troupo 6mo ago
So the original claim of "is trivially provable that Cyrillic script is better adapted even to languages which do not use it today" boils down to "in the 19th Century they cleaned up the writing system" (similarly, there
443.
by troupo 6mo ago
> None of those are digraphs or have diacritics, each is a single letter/character Okay, you got me, these don't have diacritics, but other Slavic languages do. Unicode committee decided that some of these are separate letters
444.
by troupo 6mo ago
These days every time a government as much as thinks of imponging on a supranational corporation's right to do whatever the hell it pleases you'll hear no end of cries ranging from "overregulation" to "tyranny&quot
445.
by troupo 6mo ago
So, it's not "trivially provable that Cyrillic is better suited to Slavic languages". But that "the symbols representtion we settled on in software has some difficulties disambiguatuong some, but not all cases of symbol
446.
by troupo 6mo ago
Even within Slavic languages there is plenty of weirdness: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48064121
447.
by troupo 6mo ago
Since we're talking about Serbian below, here are some characters from Cyrillic Serbian Alphabet: Ђ/ђ Ћ/ћ Љ/љ Њ/њ Џ/џ Ј/ј Various diacritical marks, digraph, a jod... What makes this Cyrillic more unambigu
448.
by troupo 6mo ago
> is trivially provable that Cyrillic script is better adapted even to languages which do not use it today, but have to resort to digraphs or glyphs with diacritics Take a look at the Cyrillic section of Unicode to see your trivially pro
449.
by troupo 6mo ago
Related, from a couple of days ago: Knitting Bullshit https://katedaviesdesigns.com/2026/04/29/knitting-bullshit/
450.
by troupo 6mo ago
But you cannot edit, add, or remove anything in this stack, and there's no way to go from it to the wallet. You have to close it, and open the actual wallet app which will show a slightly different view, and more items

More ›