Considering it's going to consume libghostty, I'm betting it'll be Zig.
172 karma · joined September 16, 2019
Latency numbers are written with three significant digits (4.21 ms). I'm curious about the accuracy of the measurement device. If it can measure tens of microseconds, I'm impressed. If it can't, the conclusions in this article should be taken more coarsely.
The author talks about the shaping of the work, so I guess this is implicit.
I agree that mentoring is hard, and I want to read your take.
I wonder if we agree on expert aesthetics or not. You write:
> Experts tend to have an aesthetic preference towards technically challenging work rather than simple-but-interesting work, and I’ve written more about this phenomenon here: expert aesthetics.
When I read the passage the first time, I thought you meant "experts prefer to work on hard problems in order to arrive at simple solutions". But that's not what you're saying!
The links are giving me 404s.
https://boydkane.com/hard https://boydkane.com/expert_aesthetics
This is about how I write Clojure.
I start out with some code that does the thing I want. Either effectfull code that "does the thing" or functions from data to data.
After a while, I feel like I'm missing a domain operation or two. At that point I've got an idea about what kind of abstraction I'm missing.
Rafael Dittwald describes the process of looking for domain operations and domain entities nicely here:
I searched around, but didn't find anything. Perhaps the title is something different than "go minimal feature set".
Though I'd rather call it a personal memex than a personal blog!
I'd say it's yours. In that frame, there are lots of ideas.
Lets assume there are 10 000 known ideas. Then there's 10^8 combinations of two ideas, and 10^12 combinations of three ideas. That's a lot of ideas, even for the internet! I bet not all of them are named. And different people are going to frame ideas differently.
I also believe trying to form your ideas in reference to existing knowledge is a great way to learn existing knowledge.
Your mind is a living collection of your own ideas, and a history of their significance to your prior life. Not a dead library of pointers to other dead libraries.
Books are great. But you shoudn't outsource your brain. The learning happens when you think for yourself. Reading is good. Thinking about what you've read is even better. But don't stop with the summary! Go further. Apply it to your context. Try it, it's fun.
Personally, I want an even higher signal to noise ratio and even fewer articles. Perhaps significance > 7, and articles from the last week.
REBL let's you browse complex data structures and move around in them. In a REPL, printing a megabyte of JSON can be ... hard to read.
I'd like to riff on this.
People's attention is limited. People's capacity for novel stuff is limited. And things are bound to be commoditized.
But that's not necessarily a bad thing. Firefox is a tool that just works for me. It doesn't crash and delete my tabs when it visits a random web site. Sure, that's predictable.
But that frees up my attention to go elsewhere. To do /brand new/ stuff, not just mess around with web browsers.
If every airbnb looks the same, perhaps that's just because people get out of the airbnb to do the stuff they actually want to do?
Stability enables movement.
I thought there were factory problems, a page with information about product returns, and possibly a story around that.
I'm going to assume you don't have people on your team / in your organization you can learn from.
In short, I'd:
1. Make something that reflects the things that I'm curious to learn
2. Then ask specific people for specific advice about the thing I've made.
https://gist.github.com/ssrihari/0bf159afb781eef7cc552a1a0b1...
Edit: if by "learning Lisp" you mean lisps other than Clojure, I don't know :)
Never used blackout curtains in Oslo or Trondheim, absolutely needed them in Finnmark. I wouldn't say that blackout curtains are the norm in the Nordic countries, especially not Denmark.
But if you're in a place where there's midnight sun, I suggest getting some.
If this makes sense to you, you can explore Visa's writing. I used to neglect taste and aesthetics. I get that you're asking for purpose. But those are related. In order to find your purpose, you must know what you value, and what you like. Visa has an angle on taste that works for me.
https://mobile.twitter.com/visakanv/status/13309873667150643...
I've been using Emacs for five years. When I got started, I also started journaling daily with Org-mode. That gave me a reason to open Emacs every day.
What's the first step to making those docs?
There are resources floating around, but they can be hard to find. I really like the docs for http-kit and luminous - they are cohesive.
I create links in two situations: (A) when I'm reading someone else's content, or (B) when I'm working on my own content.
When I'm reading someone else's content, I want to understand what they mean. I try to do that by building on other things I know. I also want to think further than the author. Apply it to my context.
When I'm creating my own content, I want to build on ideas. Refer to examples, compare to other ideas.
2. When you produce content, consider (A) what you want to achieve by producing the content, and (B) how you want to find the content later.
3. Use one global namespace for named concepts. Category / taxonomy / tags belongs in metadata.
Why the goals? If your system supports your goals, you will continue to use it and get value from it. If your system doesn't support your goals, it becomes tedious to use, and you'll abandon your notes.
I encourage you to put your notes publicly on the web. Public notes have URLs, and there's no easier way to read content. You're going to remember notes.yourname.com/THING, or just go via notes.yourname.com to list / search.
-----
My information architecture consists of named concepts, journals and metadata.
Named concepts is the top level. Wikipedia uses this structure. There's one global namespace with sufficiently qualified names. You are going to remember your note by this name. Disambiguate in your global names.
Journals are organized by date. The advantage of journals is that you don't have to name anything. In general, it's nice to start with a journal, and collect named concepts on demand. Journals don't have to be discoverable.
Metadata helps you discover and index your notes. Categories and tags go here. But don't go nuts on categorization, think about what those categories should achieve. Remember the fact boxes on Wikipedia? Those are driven by concept metadata. Sometimes it's better to embed a table or a nested list on a concept page than introduce metadata. "Is this helpful to understand the concept?" - put it on the page. "Is this helpful to find/index your content?" - it's metadata.
Let's say you want to learn FUSE (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Filesystem_in_Userspace). Create a journal page for learning FUSE, and tag it as "open problem". Make sure you can list open problems. Each time you've got some time, open your FUSE journal, and work to understand something. Read the man page. Read wikipedia. Read the source. But annotate! Take notes in your journal as you go. When you revisit your FUSE journal, you can easily rediscover where you were last time, and decide where you want to go next.
Now I've aimed for:
- minimal friction to post or edit.
- useful for my thinking process.
I touch on what I like about my process here: https://play.teod.eu/documentation/
To me, a good plan is a map of dependencies in time.