EuAndreh

Are there downsides when library writers build and publish both .so and .a files, and the library users can pick if they want to link statically or dynamically?

If so, which downsides are those?

I can't tell if they exist, and it seems to me that this is a flexible solution that gives the power of choice to the consumer of the library.

That is false. See the built-in git-send-email [0] and git-am [1] commands.

You may not like it, don't use it, etc. But Git does have collaboration tools.

[0]: https://git-scm.com/docs/git-send-email

[1]: https://git-scm.com/docs/git-am

The clear advantage that Autotools has is that it targets POSIX tools, which are the least common denominator.

m4, sh, make and friends are the shared part that every POSIX system has, without requiring any external extra tool, be it ninja/meson, etc.

Besides hand-coding a configure script that generates a Makefile yourself, Autotools is the most portable build system out there.

UTF-8

reveal.js has built-in support for markdown already https://revealjs.com/markdown/.

Is that what you are after, or you're talking about something else?

Thanks for the correction, I've amended the text.

https://euandre.org/2020/08/31/the-database-i-wish-i-had.htm...

You could just bookmark everything, and use tags for specific categories.

Maybe add a 'ril' tag for every thing you want to read later, no tags for generic queue of things to look at, 'archive' for things you want to keep, etc.

A good follow-up to this would be to get the afl-fuzz error report and send it to the maintainers. Maybe they're not even aware of those problems.

Federated: there's a distinction between clients and servers.

P2P: there are only nodes.

Isn't GUN the one with the lexicographical LWW? It may allow peers to communicate between each other, but I would fit separately from WebTorrent or SSB.

Take a look at ArchiveBox [0] if you're thinking on automating this work ;)

[0]: https://archivebox.io/

Thanks for the link :)

M-expressions:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M-expression

Great explanation.

Other than daemon implementation and design ideas that migrated from/to Nix/Guix, is there a way to write a package in Nix and use that derivation in Guix or vice-versa?

I ask thinking if it would be possible to somehow leverage the work on packages from on project to the other.

After Snowden leakage, I don't think you should take their word for it.

See also KeeWeb[0].

Also mutiplatform as KeePassXC, built on Electron. Even though it is built on JavaScript, it has 0 dependencies[1].

And the author responds well on external feedback/contributions[2].

It does support KDBX4[3].

[0]: https://keeweb.info/

[1]: https://github.com/keeweb/keeweb/blob/c651343f80f4f3d41c7d64...

[2]: https://github.com/keeweb/keeweb/issues/104

[3]: https://github.com/keeweb/keeweb/issues/326

Not loading for me.

As of version 6 of git annex, the only thing an unlocked repo need other than the usual workflow is a `git annex sync`, that could be easily configured as a push hook.

When git-annex finds a conflict it can't solve, it gives back to you the two versions of the same file with the SHA of the original versions suffixed.

This way you can look at both and resolve the conflict.

git-annex is, IMHO, by far the best solution.

Pros of git-annex:

- it is conceptually very simple: use symlinks instead of ad-hoc pointer files, virtual files system, etc. to represent symbolic pointer that point to the actual blob file;

- you can add support for any backend storage you want. As long as it support basic CRUD operations, git-annex can have it as a remote;

- you can quickly clone a huge repo by just cloning the metadata of the repo (--no-content in git-annex) and just download the necessary files on-demand;

And many other things that no other attempt even consider having, like client-side encryption, location tracking, etc.

Having nested git repositories is a solved problem both in git and in git-annex: use submodules.

https://git-annex.branchable.com/submodules/

shacharz: Any plans of working with the IPFS team? They're solving many similar problems, and they do have an js client.

Well, Apple can do whatever they want, with any language they want, better or worse, and they can still force developers to change to the latest thing.

If they say that you can develop for iOS 11 only with Swift 4, not Swift 3< or Objective-C, everybody will have to switch to Swift 4, or else they won't be able to develop to iOS 11.

Even though I also think that Swift is better than Objective-C, and getting better in each version, is not really comparable with Ruby/Python/etc.

Of course, signing is another thing to consider.

However, when the author suggests using FileVault, it shows that he doesn't consider the implications of installing a proprietary software, or using a proprietary OS.

> In a single sitting, you can make great strides toward securing your privacy.

There's no such thing as privacy when using proprietary software.

If the goal is to secure your privacy, there no need to argue beyond that.

Super high-quality article. Kudos for the author.

Since Common Lisp has a low-lever goto, it's not really required to use something like SBCL for tail-call optimization. You can write a macro for it. Check Doug Hoyte's version in Let Over Lambda:

http://letoverlambda.com/index.cl/guest/chap5.html#sec_4

Also checkout David Nolen's "Clients in Control"[0]. He approaches specifically those points mentioned, and pilfers ideas from Relay and Falcor.

[0]: http://www.datomic.com/videos.html

It really sounds like pg's suggestion to "replace email"[0].

I've never had (so far) any problem with managing my inbox, but since many can see the clear correlation between email <-> todo list, I'd say you're on to something.

[0]: http://paulgraham.com/ambitious.html

As far as I can see, they are bringing feature 9 from pg's article "What Made Lisp Different" [0].

[0]: http://www.paulgraham.com/diff.html

Yep, named-readtables do a pretty good job on packaging read-macros. You've probably missed it.