If that achieves quick COW copies of whole repo and works on Mac OS that's the solution I've been looking for last few weeks. Internets and Claude were insisting that such copies are possible only on Linux via OverlayFS. Seamless switching between unrelated features in the same repo – here I come!
First: even though the logic is connected the work happens in different packages, with different test suites and logically it’s seperate. I want the ability to traverse history of each feature separately even though they’re connected and I develop them at the same time. So package #1 has moved forward but I actually changed my mind about API for package #2 and want to roll it back. If all work happened on one branch I don’t see a simple way to do it, without rewriting history and cherry picking particular changes.
Secondly: I want to push changes separately for ease of review. Big PRs wait longer for reviews and the longer they wait the more conflicts I can get because something else has been merged while I was waiting for review.
Working in growing monorepo I find git tragically annoying and lacking. On regular basis I stumble upon situations where I work on one thing, but it causes changes in other package and I have no clear no way to say: this changes go to branch #1, this other set of changes to branch #2, and another small fix to branch #3. Branch #1 depends on the others and once #2 and #3 get merged it should merge to master cleanly with no ceremony.
Switching branches is not a solution, cause all of this changes develop at the same time.
Neither worktrees nor stashes are even nearby being a viable solution.
Unless someone enlightens me and explains how to achieve this flow easily in git I’ll be looking for better solutions. I just installed jj and I do hope it will bring some relief.
To be fair, before working in monorepo I did not have this kind of issues, or at least not that annoying. And yes, LLMs made the issue even bigger, cause it happens more often that while I’m coding on main feature I’ll write to Codex: „btw, fix this one thing while I’m busy with main tasks”, so my workstream is actually more tree-shaped than stream shaped.
It might just reignite my lost love for Analog Four that's been collecting dust for good few years. There's just too much menu digging there, even though sequencer is super fun. Will surely check it out.
Probably none. Still I’m curious what is the authors understanding. Whether he actually thinks it is a lightweight solution or whether that’s kind of advertising phrase, like ‘blazingly fast’
Just to be clear: you say by ‘dropping’ lisp you’re keeping it lightweight but it’s based on electron? So what does ‘lightweight’ mean in your opinion?
I think I am in love. Clojure + Rust, everything is typed, but I don't need to annotate. And algebraic effects that I really wanted to explore in Ocaml, but now can do it in language with way easier syntax. I might be missing bit of Clojure dynamic nature, but it looks like a bunch of really interesting ideas in one language.
Pretty arbitrary and boring set of rules. Would discuss with few of them. Repeating obvious things helps people consume content, pay attention and actually remember. You start from obvious, lead people into unknown and get back to obvious, with few additional details added along the way. It’s like a good standup show, where comic catches you in 40 minute with a joke introduced in 3rd. Then you remember. Presenting obvious, well known, information in few interesting ways is mastery. And lots of simple, short slides might really help with dynamics of your presentation.
One general rule I give to speakers, and stand by it, is: take time to breath.
I don’t see proof of usability of this rules presented in article, so yeah, just arbitrary list, don’t mind it too much. Watch good standup, and learn presentation structure from those guys.