teo_zero

Please, before commenting on this article, be sure to read Qualcomm's reply posted by adhoc_slime: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46007805

Independently of what the interpreter can do, it's #! that doesn't pass the file to it.

Wait... your interpreter reads from stdin. Shouldn't it read its first arg, instead?

> apparently I can just have done `#!bash`

I think you're mixing two concepts: relative paths (which are allowed after #! but not very useful at all) and file lookup through $PATH (which is not done by the kernel, maybe it's some shell trickery).

> we've always told people `#define xfree(p) do { free(p); p = NULL; } while (0)` is a bad pattern

Have we? Why?

> there's nothing I'd spend my money on if I can just as well install Asahi on an M-series laptop.

But such laptops don't work 100% with Asahi. Speakers and mic, external displays, fingerprint reader, suspend are the sore points I've read about, and shorter battery life compared to when they run Apple's SO.

If we're listing Team's idiosyncrasies, when you're chatting with exactly one person in a group chat after all the others have left, their name becomes "just me". You won't ever see their real name again.

I would have liked the extension named after Plan9 more than this one after Microsoft. Not based on any ideology, mind you, but rather because the former is more powerful and allows this:

  struct parent { int a; } p;
  struct child {
    struct parent;
    int b;
  } c;
  void foo(struct parent *);
  foo(&p); // valid of course
  foo(&c); // also valid under plan9 extension, no casting!

Sorry, who is "you" in your sentence? The C workgroup?

What strategy does this apply? For the display I assume it should increases the brightness as the ambient light rises. But for keybord light it's the opposite: I'd want it off in a lit environment and on in a dark one.

This is not valid C, though. The characters allowed for identifiers are defined in Unicode Standard Annex #31, and those easily understood as operators, like arrows, are not included.

Beautiful.

The site should be more explicit about which characters are covered. I understand it's only ASCII, right? Although the example shows some currency signs that are definitely out of the 0-127 plane.

It would also be appreciated if you could suggest a fallback font for those glyphs not present in Myna, so that if I ever need to include the word "naïve" in a string, for example, the "ï" won't look as an alien character.

It doesn't look so convenient to me. If Ctrl+v is bound to paste, how do you insert a verbatim character in the shell? How do you start a block visual selection in Vim? How do you scroll down in emacs?

I tend to visualize the position of the numbers on a phone's keypad. The sequence is then the travel to touch them in order. For some reason, I find easier to memorize that shape than the single digits.

While effective, a tag is not efficient. Namely it misses two properties: "quickly" and "at a distance".

Why not "def"?

No if you're allowed to only get an immutable reference from an immutable variable.

I like the concept. I don't buy all the author's personal choices, though.

I think the highlighting should serve 2 purposes: 1. help you parse the code, and 2. put more or less emphasis on some elements.

Comments have a primary role when reading someone's code, so they deserve a distinguished color by virtue of point 2 above.

Strings are sometimes difficult to parse correctly because the symbol to start them is the same to end them, so item 1 above applies.

And variable definitions have the tendency of hiding in plain sight, despite being crucial to understand a piece of code, so they match both criteria 1 and 2.

But numbers, booleans and constants can't be possibly mistaken for anything else, nor do they need to stand out more than the rest, so why highlighting them?

Deemphasizing punctuation might be a good idea: I'd probably reserve the same treatment to some common boilerplates, too, like #include in C/C++, #[derive] in Rust, etc.

Finally many languages make it hard to tell types and variables apart. Therefore I'd argue that types deserve their own coloring, obeying reason 1 above.

To add a final nitpick, the two "use" statements in the example define two symbols, "FilterType" and "Error". I think only these two words should be highlighted in blue, not the rest of the hierarchy.

> you may also want to look into Squirrel

Is it still active? Last release was in 2022...

Misleading title. Other shapes have been well known for years, like a sphere. The novelty here is the first polyhedron that can't pass through itself.

Please note that 'each' is fundamentally different from 'xargs'.

  echo 1 2 3 | each "rm {}"

is the same as

  rm 1
  rm 2
  rm 3

while

  echo 1 2 3 | xargs rm

is the same as

  rm 1 2 3

I would rather say that 'each' replaces (certain uses of) 'for':

  for i in 1 2 3; do rm $i; done

Clever, but I prefer the parent's proposal:

  return (0x43201 >> x*4) & 7

It's more understandable and the number of instructions is the same.

Apart from being 2 years late, the article missed the number-1 cause of depreciation: fast progress in battery tech means that in 2 years your battery, even if its health doesn't deteriorate, will be much less performant than then-new ones.

Honestly, it looks like a ransom request letter! :D

> Render the () characters as different matching glyph pairs.

Interesting. But how many matching glyph pairs do we actually have in current fonts?

It's some time since I've worked with (and contributed to) tree-sitter, but it could exclusively detect syntax, not semantic, back then. For example it could not tell variables from types in C, nor already-defined variables from new/mistyped ones.

Have I missed an important development in tree-sitter? Can it now do such things?

Moving to the next point of interest and highlighting all the occurrences are not mutually exclusive. In fact searches work like this in many apps.

> You are an AI Bot that is very good at mimicking an author writing style. - Your goal is to write content with the tone that is described below

Genuine question: does this formulation style work better than a plain, direct "Mimick my writing style. Use the tone that is described below"?

Ok. JJ wins this round. Go to commit, fix, go to commit is superior to this bunch of commands in every possible way.

Thank you. I've just run through a jj tutorial and it indeed mirrors my mental model of commits, just like gitless did. I'm sure I'll become a fan!