I absolutely would. I feel like the text editing ecosystem is slowly inching towards this anyway with incremental improvements:
- Thanks to formatters like gofmt and prettier when I edit code I can do so with exactly zero concern for spacing, new lines, alignment, indent, etc. Close to structure editors where, in my understanding, the way code is stored and the way it is presented may be completely independent.
- Mass-renaming like what is provided by LSPs and other refactoring tools also go in this direction of thinking about symbols and their identity, rather than their text name.
- Tree-sitter lets traditionally text-oriented tools be re-created to be structure-aware, for example difftastic for diffs or ast-grep for structured search-and-replace.
I didn’t quite understand how the structure editor shown here works with types though, and though I’d love to edit my Typescript in a structure editor that just couldn’t work if my inputs got delayed by the Typescript type system figuring things out. I would take enforced type correctness if it can be instant, but I’d still use structure editing without type awareness.
From the information I could gather the only payment option is debit/credit card. If this is accurate it looks particularly exclusionary to me because one cannot expect each and every one of the 1.4 billion (according to the linked page) affected people have or can have a bank account.
Also this creates unwritten requirements to traveling to the EU:
1. You must have a bank account.
2. Mastercard/Visas/$otherPaymentProcessor will be aware of your application.
I don’t have an issue with these payment methods being available, I take issue with them being the only available methods. Countries’ immigration departments have no business compelling travellers into a contract with a private entity (the bank), and I also believe their dealings with european immigration departments shouldn’t be exposed to foreign payment processors.
At the very least cash payment at a local embassy should be an option.
I scan all documents and paper mail and store the scans in a git annex repo with a few replicas on machines I own or rent. Originals go into binders, ordered by the hash of the document. With a few helper scripts and OCR with Tesseract searching through my documents is surprisingly fast, so is adding new documents at the proper place in the binders. The idea behind ordering by sha1 of the scan was that the binders would be storage only and all categorizing and organizing should be digital, and also that as I add more documents load balancing between the binders is trivial: at the moment I have one binder for hash prefixes 0-7 and one for 8-f, with a divider for each one-hex-digit prefix. If I ever feel there are too many docs per divider I can split further.
Emails go into a plain git repo, and photos go into another git annex repo.
Ideally I’d like to put all of that into Perkeep because I like the idea of just throwing anonymous blobs into a bucket with the possibility to organize and tag them after the fact, but it looks like that project is dead and I would need to add a few things to it to support my use cases.
I store a lot of scans and emails I won’t ever need again. I just consider that storage becomes cheaper faster than my storage needs increase, and that storing extra documents and saving myself the need to decide whether it’s worth keeping, is a good tradeoff.
Not to mention, there exist airports that are jointly administered by multiple country. One example I know of is EuroAirport Basel Mulhouse, located a few kilometers away from the meeting point of the French, German and Swiss borders. It is located on French soil but administered by both France and Switzerland and has three airport codes: MLH for France, BSL for Switzerland and EAP as a neutral code. The national codes could be used as proxies for timezones if France or Switzerland ever changed their timezone, but what EAP stands for would be challenging to define.
The author writes “I've also since learned that the way Japanese developers write Ruby is very different from the Ruby you'll typically see in Rails, or many other popular Ruby gems.”
What would be some examples of “Japanese-style Ruby”? I can find some articles comparing Ruby to Japanese but I’d be interested in full code repositories that would fit this description to go and take a look. I can’t think of good search terms for that.
- Thanks to formatters like gofmt and prettier when I edit code I can do so with exactly zero concern for spacing, new lines, alignment, indent, etc. Close to structure editors where, in my understanding, the way code is stored and the way it is presented may be completely independent.
- Mass-renaming like what is provided by LSPs and other refactoring tools also go in this direction of thinking about symbols and their identity, rather than their text name.
- Tree-sitter lets traditionally text-oriented tools be re-created to be structure-aware, for example difftastic for diffs or ast-grep for structured search-and-replace.
I didn’t quite understand how the structure editor shown here works with types though, and though I’d love to edit my Typescript in a structure editor that just couldn’t work if my inputs got delayed by the Typescript type system figuring things out. I would take enforced type correctness if it can be instant, but I’d still use structure editing without type awareness.