We already have a tool for that: it's called "code written by a programmer." Being human-like is the exact opposite of being computer-like, and I really fear that handling language properly either requires human-likeness or requires a lot of manual effort to put into code. Perhaps there's an algorithm that will be able to replace that manual work, but we're unlikely to discover it unless the real world gives us a hint.
I came across this hackernews.hn domain while looking at random TLDs. I saw ".hn" and thought, "oh, that would be fitting for Hacker News," then opened it to see an actual HN proxy. I know this is pretty pointless, but I'm wondering who owns this and why; perhaps some of the regulars on here might know. Whois doesn't reveal anything interesting about it at all.
From what I can tell, this language builds on the learnings of Eve[1] without any investor money (Eve ran out of funding[2]). The state of the project is questionable, as can be seen by the dates on this page. Their active repository seems to be on GitLab[3] despite the links on the landing and in the README. It doesn't look like it has a lot of contributors or even people observing it, so I thought the HN crowd might want to look into this. I tried to find a Discord server or something like that, but it looks like they just communicate over email, so I have no clue as to what use they're making of their potential community involvement.
Same experience here, although I only did one year of Montessori before my parents luckily realized its ineffectiveness. I would quickly find all materials "boring" and didn't want to do them anymore. I guess it could get me to hyperfocus occasionally, but definitely not enough.
It's easier to phrase your speech in a charismatic way when it's written. Plus, you're probably not reading a lot of downvoted/ignored comments, which actually represent most HN readers.
That's what I was thinking, too. Maybe also add some content-addressability or timestamp IDs into the mix to make renaming a safe operation. And just FYI: there is a reason why Git puts objects in subdirectories. Filesystem-based operating systems are surprisingly bad at handling extreme filesystems, so it might be wise to do what Git does in the main directory.
> No space before the colon in type annotations in the default formatting.
Why do people like that kind of syntax? I know it's more symmetrical, but what personally bothers me is that it's grammatically incorrect. We're already used to placing colons right after words, so why change it?
Unix will never to achieve true user-friendliness and wide adoption if we treat settings like this. The reality is that most people need a graphical, hard to break way of changing their settings to use your software.
Edit: Although I agree that some situations may require a readable text format, like a dotfiles repo. I personally use the `dconf-editor` program to find the right keys and the `dconf load` command to sync them from a regedit-like file format
Yes. We need to develop easier ways of deploying self-hosted apps, which unfortunately isn't happening now because of a "I need demand to create demand" cycle that someone has to kick off. Panels like portainer are already a step in the right direction.
We already have a tool for that: it's called "code written by a programmer." Being human-like is the exact opposite of being computer-like, and I really fear that handling language properly either requires human-likeness or requires a lot of manual effort to put into code. Perhaps there's an algorithm that will be able to replace that manual work, but we're unlikely to discover it unless the real world gives us a hint.