The essential work of is building the theory of the problem + solution. Theory then enables creation of working code. In the end, the code is necessary, but it is not sufficient. Theory is indispensable. (cf. Peter Naur, 1985)
Any conversation
"for you" now contains the same message multiple times
โฆ
added two more screenshots to - the "root" post view is incorrect, but when reply-on-reply, information goes up-then-down.
root post view IS correct, sorry.
I understand your confusion, but that's the formatting - quoted parent is below the child post - then that post's replies follow in the discussion view. The top post is always quoting its parent below it, the different bg makes it distinct. Just need to get used to it, same on X.
There really is no other way to include the parent otherwise, you have to break the hierarchy at some point, the other form would need to omit the parent body and show a 'parent' link but we want to include its body.
Any users around?
I have been customizing it to the way I work, as it is meant to be. Bent it in a way that I enjoy holding it, so to say.
Maybe someone will find those useful, so I took the time to get it published.
Gruntfooot is a footer customization, where you can try new colors/glyphs in real time and also has theme support.
I was curious of testing the Omarchy distribution this week just because I had some free time to work on it. I saw a lot of hate around it and kind of get the point but so far at least for what I have been doing it wasn't terrible (at least at the point of writing this) although I am not trying to convince anybody to use it. But it just remember me how much do I hate MS.
โฆ
not my blog but i recently discovered acko.net which i can recommend. awesome personal website
@fastidiousprofilefollow
"Beware those that would deny you access to information, for in their heart they dream themselves your master." โ Sid Meyersreplied to:
"Beware those that would deny you access to information, for in their heart they dream themselves your master." โ Sid Meyersreplied to:That site makes me dizzy with all the animations and fly ins/outs.
Really glad to be using Haskell for work - especially in today's climate with agentic coding.
Our team uses containers to keep our development environment consistent across team members, though, and most agent sandbox approaches want to either offload your work fully to the cloud or they want to sandbox the agent harness process itself.
We're not ready for full cloud based development (yet?) and sandboxing just the agent doesn't work for us when the agent needs to run docker.
... because letting the agent run docker gives them a too-easy escape hatch from their sandbox.
So we're currently stuck with using VMs. This turns out to be tricky but seems do-able.
My current approach is to provision a VM image and use Incus for the execution. My main goal is to keep my current workflow of local/non-agent dev working seamlessly and share the source with the VM/agent.
This means sharing my working dirs with the agent VM but overlaying artifact dirs from VM-owned block devices so we don't take too big of an IO perf hit.
I also don't want the agent to be able to
git push so that means we need some quirky git config to rewrite origin paths and thread through some agent specific PATs ("thanks" GitHub) for read-only repo access. These ALSO need to be threaded through to the development containers - they need to clone private repos.... in the end, this seems to work but I haven't lived with it for long.
There are still some quality of life issues to work out, but I think it'll work out.
At this point, I've removed all coding agents from my host - and that's nice.
Curious, why does using Haskell make a difference here?
It's tangential to the sandboxing topic, really. I started the first post with a broader intent in mind and then elaborated on the sandboxing setup I'm working on.
For AI-assisted coding, though, it's nice because Haskell provides a lot of feedback earlier in the development process compared to lots of other languages. It tends to work once it compiles (obviously not all the time).
Can you learn programming by building with AI?
Better than before5%
About the same0%
Worse than before55%
Depends how you use it40%
If programming is the typing of characters into a text file, it is way worse. I think the key to learning is still doing it rather than reading it. If the question is about system design I think you can, but only if you curious and it becomes a problem that needs to be solved.
Asking "What do you think" is one of my favorite questions to learn at the moment.
I do think there will be what were hard earned lessons about system design, code smell, designing data structures for the hardware you're running on, concurrency golden paths, etc., which are now with agentic dev even harder to learn and internalize. But also if you have an excellent teacher in the form of an actually-good model pair programming with you always, maybe not? Maybe a pair programming AI programming tutor would be a good Zed/vscode extension. Or product.
I've been on a kick lately of trying to visualize the oscillating clock, and ultimately the effectively arbitrarily complex activity of a computer processor, as modern refinements of the line shaft factory of the 19th century. Of compute as being not much more than profoundly refined "work" delivered by the electrical grid into marvelously complex machines.
Does that, as a metaphor at least, feel as important to you as it has to me of late? We spend so much time in a world abstracted.