965 karma · joined March 17, 2012
While this may not be the only explanation for why this trend continues, I think it's *spot on* to explain why this continues in commercially-funded software.
Just a good reminder that dependencies will always let you down. It's just a matter of time. Oh, and never turn your back on a big company.
Here's the tracking on this issue:
https://github.com/community/community/discussions/48173
GitHub: "The VundleVim organization has been flagged. Because of that, your organization is hidden from the public."
I was thinking about that book just yesterday. I find something about the way it goes "all in" on a tabletop gaming system deeply appealing. Probably for the same reasons I find pencil and paper RPGs and programming computers appealing.
> The answer is Ctrl+W. Because Ctrl+W is provided by something called TTY, and the other three are provided by the shell.
My only criticism is a pet peeve of mine: screenshots of terminals. I know it's more work to copy/paste and make sure formatting is correct, and you lose the ANSI colors. But it just feels so wasteful and inaccessible (<img alt="tty">).
I love reading C2, but anything in reference to ed(1) besides "Ed, man! !man ed" is wasting my VALUABLE time. :-)
> "A complex system that works is invariably found to have evolved from a simple system that works. The inverse proposition also appears to be true: A complex system designed from scratch never works and cannot be made to work."
--John Gall, Systemantics (1975)
The files you're managing don't even need to be text, though, of course, it makes versioning, etc. a lot easier.
I also check the host name in some of the scripts to modify behavior depending on the machine.
I did a write-up about my whole setup (emphasis on GNU Stow + Git) here:
Content is statically generated from an AsciiDoc text file wiki managed by a Vim plugin. Though I write heavy Web applications for a living, there's no JS on my personal website except on specific pages with interactive tools. After a revamp a couple years ago, all dynamic server-side actions are handled with old-school CGI applications. Retro and loving it.
I'm really enjoying looking at everyone else's sites!
> The first edition in turn constituted a major revision of a previous textbook also written by Hopcroft and Ullman, entitled Formal Languages and Their Relation to Automata.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Introduction_to_Automata_Theor...
Used copy ordered.
Searching for that title also lead me to _Introduction to Formal Languages_ by Gyorgy E. Revesz, which also looks like a good fit and which Dover is currently printing as one of their reasonably-priced paperbacks!
> Among his [Backus's] library at the time were the works of the modern philosopher and theorist Noam Chomsky, who studied the evolution of the human intellect and of written and spoken language in parallel. Chomsky was developing a symbolic syntax with which to frame his concepts of languages within languages, in the study of how sociology affects grammar. Backus borrowed some of Chomsky's concepts, including the idea that a symbology could represent a computer language...even one that didn't yet exist.
So again, it all seems to point back to Noam Chomsky. I do have a copy of Chomsky's _Aspects of the Theory of Syntax_ coming to my home soon. Should be interesting.
In yet other words: I don't know what I don't know about grammar.
This may be true for ants. But I've never seen how this can be an absolute truth for humans for two reasons:
1. If one life is truly meaningless (0), how does multiplying it produce meaning (0 * 8 billion = 0)?
2. If you found yourself to be the last person on the planet, would you A) realize you have no meaning and die, B) create art and put a little more beauty into the universe? Given those choices, does option A or B have more inherent "meaning"?