1. 4

    Mainly for that reason I switched to a combo bitlbee + weechat + (screen + mosh + weechat-ncurses)

    It was a bit long to set up everything and there are still some rough edges. But, now with about 3Mo of RAM I can chat with:

    • 3 slack community with lot of channels
    • some gitter channels
    • many IRC channels freenode
    • hipchat

    I have manually set alerts. The text use my preferred color theme. Typically the only other reason to get rid of slack is that I couldn’t have clear text on dark background.

    Now my chat system feels like a calm place to discuss.

    1. [Comment removed by author]

      1. 4

        I am a heavy org-mode user too, one feature I use a lot is capture templates, actually. I have one for taking meeting notes, another for recording project decisions, and another for any arbitrary notes I think are worth remembering.

        1. 1

          The one thing I really dislike about org-mode is that I could never find a decent CLI app for it. Sometimes I just wanna query from the command line without firing up emacs. If someone has a decent utility to talk to org-mode files without org-mode, please please send it my way.

          1. 3

            This might seem a bit obvious but the best support for org-mode is always going to be within Emacs. So why not write whatever is it that you’re after as a eshell/emacs script that you run from the command line?

            1. 2

              I’ve alliased vi to emacsclient -t it launches an emacs server on the first call the next call will open it almost instantaneously. Perhaps it would be good enough for you.

              1. 1

                Some suggestions to make this easier:

                • grep -E '^\*+ TODO' has always been good for me as my “todo” alias.
                • org-batch-agenda-csv can be used along with pulling your org-agenda-files and agenda config into a separate file, and you can use that with other CLI tools fairly easily.

                They’re only textfiles, I think state changes are the hard part without emacs

                1. 1

                  I think the beginning of your last sentence is really the key for me. “They’re only text files”. I can script the hell out of those, as it turns out. Onwards!

                  Seriously though, one of my main cases is to have a way to accumulate notes easily. I always have an emacs instance running too. I think my problem might abstract itself away, in the end.

                2. 1

                  what kinds of queries? you can always run emacs with a one off command against a file. alias that in your shell.

                  see:

                  https://www.emacswiki.org/emacs/BatchMode

                  https://emacs.stackexchange.com/questions/18111/query-the-org-agenda-from-the-commandline#18119

                  you could also just do a simple ag or grep search as org files are all just text depending on what you want to do.

              2. 3

                I love org-mode and consistently feel like I’ve barely scratched the surface. You can start with a really simple workflow and build it out as you see fit. Occasionally I end up in a yak shave, like trying to sync with google calendar or jira or some other part of the outside world, but yeah emacs + org-mode + (some file syncing service) has served me well.

                1. 2

                  I also use org-mode with deft. My ~/.deft is a symlink to a folder in my iCloud drive so my notes are always sync and saved. Furthermore I also append .gpg to the file name so my notes are encrypted with my gpg.

                  1. 1

                    Org-mode is also what I use. I’ve tried many different tools, but come back to org-mode each time - it’s worth learning emacs basics just for org-mode. For example, I love how I can get a myriad of different views and reports on how I spend my time.

                    Here is an example clock report from a few weeks ago. (The far-right column, unlabeled, is actually a custom calculation, my estimated hourly-rate multiplied by how much time I spent on the task. I use this to estimate how “valuable” a task is. It’s not a perfect metric, but I find it’s better than just time-spent on a task.)

                    I try to put everything in org-mode, and the more I do so, the more organized I get and the more I get done. Like (I think) Peter Drucker said “what gets measured, gets managed.” Org-mode is my manager-self, so my engineer-self can actually get work done without worrying about which work is important.

                  1. 11

                    I totally agree with most of the content of this article but. Regarding formatting I would go farther than that.

                    I would love if all programming language had “normal form” for their source code. The very least would be that Formatter should be projections ( format(x) = format(format(x)) ). But a normal form would be even better. I know this is something very difficult to achieve mostly because of social issues regarding code formatting preferences. Typically, what about the 80 column rule? Etc… By normal form I mean a function that would parse your code to an AST and only use the AST to output a formatted text. The normal form won’t be affected by adding/removing a newline, adding spaces/tabs, changing alignments. It should be affected by comment though, that would certainly change some programming languages paradigm because it would mean that the comment should be part of the AST even if ignored. I am sure I forget a lot of difficulties about how to write one.

                    One big advantage about having such a normal form is that it would separate the “syntax” from the “AST” and it would be easier to split the “parsing” of your language for your preferred syntax. It would then be easier to have tools that could provide different equivalent syntaxes for your language. You could choose between “C/C++/Javascript like format”, “Python / Ruby” like format, ML/Haskell-like format, LISP like format, etc… But in the end the code would only be the “AST” using one of those format, typically the one considered the most readable by the team. Also it would greatly reduce “false” commit that are only a reformatting away.

                    1. 5

                      This idea has been tried MANY times. I watched a talk about a Lisp that provided skinnable Python, C, etc. syntax maybe 12 years ago.

                      I would just try making a language yourself that does this, and you might realize why it isn’t a more widely adopted idea. It’s not like nobody has thought of it for the last 20-30 years.

                      1. 1

                        I came up with a very similar idea. I got it from GUI skinning. So, you have the base language represented by a grammar or something. Then, the IDE can let the programmer define their own syntax that any file they receive is automatically converted to. Then, there were certain differences in structuring that might be handled with source-to-source translation like in Semantic Design’s tool.

                        I never went past the concept, though.

                        1. 4

                          You can do this with reader macros in lisp. In addition to switching per file, you can switch between syntaxes in the same file with #. Most people don’t bother, but it’s already implemented if you want it.

                        2. 1

                          Not only is that very difficult to do technically, it ignores that languages are usually chosen to take advantage of concepts that may not exist in another language.

                          If I write a template in C++, how do I translate that into Haskell? How do I translate it to Go? If I use the built-in parallelism in Erlang, how do I translate that to Python? If I use a Python list, what does that become in C++?

                          It’d be incredibly difficult to implement, or it would end up with a common denominator subset of features that wasn’t particularly useful.

                          I think a group of languages could be designed from the ground up to be AST compatible with each other, but I doubt it’s possible to do for an arbitrary group of existing languages.

                        1. 1

                          I considered stow, but I finally decided to use yadm The main reason is because I can easily encrypt sensible files with yadm.

                          Also yadm works with my git aliases. So using yadm feels exactly like using git with my personal preferences.

                          1. 1

                            Hhm looks pretty interesting, does it support other vcs than git? And I think some of the password encryption stuff could be managed by something like pass

                          1. 3

                            I’m a bit of a Scala newcomer and pretty much write all my code to run on Spark, but have completed a few of the Coursera courses. Can someone point me at the shortcomings or danger zones of Scala? To me at least it doesn’t seem like there is a language out there that is functional, type safe and expressive like Scala which works universally in back-end services, web apps, and big data apps running on Spark/Kafka/etc. The only other language that is similar in this respect is Clojure but it’s not statically typed which is something I’m drawn to coming from Python. Are there alternatives to Scala people should be looking it?

                            1. 7

                              To me, the big danger zone is that Scala has two largely incompatible groups of users. One is happy to use a better Java, the other is essentially writing Haskell on the JVM. Neither group likes the other’s code. The Haskell-flavored-Scala folks tend to be blowhards about it more often than the better-Java folks, so expect that style to win in any given project/organization. Also expect to lose people because of it. I’ve seen this happen from up close and from afar.

                              I wish Scala the language were separable from Scala the community. There are some great ideas in there, but I’m happier using most of them in a different language.

                              1. 5

                                F# and Ocaml seem like strong contenders. Less Ocaml, but that’s mostly because of library support.

                                1. 3

                                  You can take a look at Haskell or close to Haskell languages:

                                  At least Haskell is functional, type safe, and certainly as expressive as Scala. I used it Haskell along kafka, and for backend services as web apps. The first link talk about how it is used by tweag.io to run on Spark, I don’t have any personal experience with that.

                                  1. 2

                                    I do think Scala is the best language going at the moment. But there are various rough edges, partly to do with JVM compatibility and partly to do with backwards compatibility with previous versions of Scala, plus the occasional bad design decision; just stuff like null, ClassTag, the contortions needed to implement HList and Record (which largely don’t cause problems for correct code but show up in things like the error messages you get when you make a mistake), the lack of enums or any truly first-class kind of sum type….

                                    Pitfalls to avoid: SBT, akka actors, the cake pattern, pattern matching where it’s impossible to tell safe from unsafe, monad-like types that don’t obey the laws, implicit parameters used as actual parameters (something Odersky is now promoting), lack of kind polymorphism…

                                    In terms of alternatives F# and OCaml don’t have HKT; Haskell is an option but seems to introduce as many problems as it solves (laziness making performance reasoning hard, lack of good tooling, limited compatibility with other ecosystems). I had high hopes for Ceylon but I’ve come to think union types are the wrong thing (they’re inherently noncompositional compared to the opaque disjoint union kind of sum type). I’m excited for Idris - that seems to take the good parts of Scala and also bring something new and valuable to the table.

                                  1. 9

                                    I’m so glad to see this kind of blog posts about Nix.

                                    I’m under the impression that Nix has the same problem than git. Pretty neat tool but with terrible user interface. And for me it ends up on what could look like meaningless details.

                                    Imagine if instead of nix-env -qa <pkg> it was nix search <pkg>, if instead of nix-env -i <pkg> it was nix install <pkg>, if instead of nix-store --gc it was nix clean etc…

                                    Of course I could always use personal aliases. But that’s not the point. The UI change how I can think about the tool, in the same way that git checkout can be used for different purposes in my mind (reverting a file, changing my current branch…)

                                    1. 10

                                      I’m so glad you think so, too. Fortunately we have a new UI in the works, to make the UI reasonable.

                                    1. 3

                                      Stepping aside: Python, Ruby, Go, C++, Java, etc, and focusing on Clojure (as dynamic lang) and Haskell (as static lang) :

                                      Clojure:

                                      • Iteration Speed: YES
                                      • Correctness Checking: NO
                                      • Concise syntax : YES
                                      • Editing support : YES (spacemacs / cider)
                                      • Debugging support : YES

                                      Haskell:

                                      • Iteration Speed: YES (faster and better than Clojure)
                                      • Correctness Checking: YES
                                      • Concise syntax : YES
                                      • Editing support : YES (spacemacs / intero or ghc-mod)
                                      • Debugging support : YES

                                      Nice language features forgotten in the blog post:

                                      • Profiling: Clojure YES, Haskell YES
                                      • Fun : Clojure YES, Haskell YES
                                      • Fast startup time: Clojure NO, Haskell YES
                                      • Frontend Programming: Clojure YES, Haskell YES
                                      1. 13

                                        When I’m talking to people who are evaluating Haskell and trying to determine its risks, these things never come up. It’s always the same thing which can essentially be summed up as “library support”

                                        • Can I do MVC web dev?
                                        • How do I keep the code in sync with the database (migrations)?
                                        • How do I do performance (response time) monitoring?
                                        • Can I still use papertrail (or similar logging aggregation/search service)?
                                        • What’s the equivalent to getsentry.com for haskell?
                                        • How do I do continuous deployments from <my favorite CI service>?

                                        The flaws Mitchell is addressing here real flaws that affect people that are already pretty deep in Haskell-land. All of the above still have unsatisfactory answers IMO, even though it certainly can be done.

                                        1. 14

                                          Can I do MVC web dev?

                                          Yes. Most of the Yesod apps I work on have models, controllers, and views. I used Clojure and Python (Django) before Haskell, so I know what people expect here and it’s fine.

                                          How do I keep the code in sync with the database (migrations)?

                                          http://hackage.haskell.org/package/persistent ( I streamed some of this and web dev last night: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uYXX1t3GrsE )

                                          How do I do performance (response time) monitoring?

                                          http://hackage.haskell.org/package/datadog

                                          http://hackage.haskell.org/package/statsd-datadog

                                          Can I still use papertrail (or similar logging aggregation/search service)?

                                          http://hackage.haskell.org/package/katip-elasticsearch + treasure or whatever you want really.

                                          What’s the equivalent to getsentry.com for haskell?

                                          Sentry. http://hackage.haskell.org/package/raven-haskell Might could use some fixing up, but I’ve used this in prod and it was fine.

                                          How do I do continuous deployments from <my favorite CI service>?

                                          rsync a binary from your CI build/run ansible, bounce the upstart daemon. Our deployment stuff is in Ansible.

                                          Also see: http://haskelliseasy.com for other questions like this.

                                          1. 3
                                            1. Can I do MVC web dev? yes with Yesod, Snap and Happstack web framework (but there are other paradigms that really are worth at least an exploration)
                                            2. DB sync, using Yesod and more generally persistent will handle naive case automatically forces you to write the right db migration. So at least with yesod and persistent you can’t run code on a non compatible DB.
                                            3. papertrail (never heard about this service), but I imagine this is a service similar to grayling and yes there is a package to support it
                                            4. getsentry support: yes (https://hackage.haskell.org/package/raven-haskell-0.1.0.1/docs/System-Log-Raven.html)
                                            5. CI: http://yannesposito.com/Scratch/en/blog/Haskell-Tutorials--a-tutorial/#continuous-integration

                                            In my opinion, Haskell is a language completely suitable for production if you want to use traditional paradigms.

                                            But Haskell has a lot more to offer. There are many paradigms shift done in Haskell. For example, you can take a look at transient (see this recent thread for example):

                                            https://www.reddit.com/r/elm/comments/4wq3ko/playing_with_websockets_in_haskell_and_elm/d69o11p

                                            You might dislike the syntax, and believe that the example is quite minimalist. But it show that while MVC has its virtues, it is not the alpha and omega of web development and there can be another way of thinking about a web application as we are used to.

                                            1. 1

                                              compojure-api which is really great.

                                              1. 3
                                                • tried sandboxes (doesn’t work)
                                                • tried cabal freeze (made things slightly better)
                                                • tried nix (on Mac), hard to use and didn’t worked
                                                • tried stackage and Haskell LTS works like a charm. Never had any more problem with it.

                                                So, use global conf for Haskell LTS. Easy and efficient. Think of Haskell LTS as Debian stable for Haskell packages.

                                                1. 15

                                                  This article put a finger in a major problem in programming.

                                                  One one side, you can choose simples lean libraries. Using them to resolve simple problems is really easy, but once you want to use them to create a big application you are doomed to code yourself the same patterns again and again.

                                                  So frameworks appears to fill the gap, and provide you a good architecture to organize your big application.

                                                  There are two kind of frameworks:

                                                  • the specialized one; they take decisions that remove a lot of your liberties. But are very efficient in their subdomain.
                                                  • the framework that promise everything: clean organization and liberty.

                                                  The second type of framework are from my experience complete failures. I am under the impression that Angular is in this category. Complex framework that promise everything, and therefore you end up having a lot of false complexity. Angular kind of becomes the Java J2EE of the js world.

                                                  1. 6

                                                    I am in no way in allegiance with AngularJs, but if you don’t mind hearing from an actual working developer who actually uses a lot of AngularJs maybe you’ll get a fair representation of it’s use as a front-end framework. I do work at a large enterprise company, and we typically use AngularJs because it’s easy to learn and pickup, and there’s a ton of documentation online on just about everything you’d like to do with a SPA. It’s well supported cross-browser, though we run into a bug or two on IE, generally there’s always an easy work around to fix it and we rarely have to deal with cross-browser issues. Generally speaking, unless you’re building something complicated, a developer can get up and running building an SPA within two weeks – as in, just about anybody, such as a junior right out of community college, can write a decent commerical grade AngularJs SPA within weeks. We rarely use services for anything other than making http calls to our API, but factories can be customized to be used in a lot of other ways. They’re the main way to share data across controllers – generally, you keep one controller per view, and share data between them using services (i.e. factories). The design pattern is meant to be simple, so it’s easy to pick up quickly. So far, we’ve seen nothing but success from AngularJs. It hasn’t failed in any significant way since we’ve started using it a year and a half ago, and it’s significantly reduces dev time (and therefore costs).

                                                    I haven’t had the opportunity to use ReactJS on a significant project, but I notice it’s used a lot by the consulting/developers-who-blog community (as opposed to the working community). From a technical stand point, it looks a lot more flexible, in the sense that it isn’t an MVC (or uses any pattern for that matter), and all extensions are components that can be added on an as need basis. I’ve also read that Om renders faster than angular/ember/backbone. It’s probably a very good tool for building SPAs, but it also looks like it has a stepper learning curve – from my initial impressions of it – though like I said – I haven’t had the chance to use it on anything significant yet.

                                                    I wouldn’t say I’d use AngularJs for everything – I’ve noticed most of Google’s products haven’t been written in Angular, but if you are building a significantly important enough project – I’d probably go the route of not using any framework at all and use all custom JS period.

                                                    Honestly, articles like these are very silly. His opinion was based on a pretty shallow early impression of something he barely knows anything about – yet it still elicited 300+ comments. The fact that someone can write an blog article with a title like “you have ruined javascript” and evoke so much attention disappoints me.

                                                    I think skepticism is a natural healthy reaction towards any system, but I think the issue revolves more around the abuses of big business than the specific technology and technical issues at hand. Also, I think there’s way more excessive crap being built for ember these days within the open source community – from what I’ve noticed around the internet….

                                                    1. 3

                                                      From the technical point of view, Angular if far from being the worst. I came from jQuery land and used Angular for some slightly complex dashboards. Angular was great to use then. Mostly because at the time the documentation was mostly inexistant and we have chosen to use only a small part of what angular propose.

                                                      Now we switched from Angular to React, more precisely reagent. Which make a double jump, one from Angular to React the other from javascript to Clojurescript. While reagent is still not perfect it is far better to use. The actual application is far more complex than before. But with reagent we minimized our boilerplate, and administrative decisions comparatively to Angular.

                                                      So yes, Angular is good, and easy to learn. But reagent is better and easier to learn.

                                                      Actually if I had to choose, I believe I’ll give a chance to elm (elm-html + ports more precisely). Until here the elm concepts feel really adapted to big applications and interoperability with external resources.

                                                      So the technical point is, yes Angular is better than jQuery, lighter than ember, but React is better than Angular, reagent better than just React, elm apparently better than reagent.

                                                      Now, my remark wasn’t only valid for frontend frameworks. But more generally in the “framework vs library” debate, framework are great if they specialize on a narrow domain and don’t try to generalize their concept to all domains. If you don’t know where you’ll end up, chances are libraries are the way to go.

                                                      If you try to make your framework play out of its specialized garden, then you soon start to create a bunch of new organizational concepts. Generally at the end of the day, your framework will look like an insane administration.

                                                      While Angular is far from being the worst, there are better alternatives. Because I sincerely believe that elm is easier to learn and master than Angular (if you aren’t afraid by a new syntax).

                                                      1. 2

                                                        From a technical stand point, [ReactJS] looks a lot more flexible, in the sense that it isn’t an MVC (or uses any pattern for that matter)

                                                        You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

                                                    1. 9

                                                      This week, I’ll try to integrate elm with highcharts to make reactive dashboard interface without reinventing the wheel. I already have a demo with one chart that subscribe to mouse events and display them in real time in a chart. The working demo is here: https://github.com/yogsototh/elm-highchart Until here, it is a great experience, the latest changes in the elm core libs are really welcome and the ports part is butter smooth.

                                                      I’ve started to write a blog post about the vim plugins I use. In particular, I find my actual Haskell vim environment just great. It detects errors at save time and I am generally told some good advices to make my program work. I also use quite a nice Clojure programming environment and I wanted to share it.

                                                      I don’t know if I could achieve much during Christmas time.

                                                      1. 4

                                                        my preferred part:

                                                        On the next page of the wizard, select the Web Application check box (1) and then select 3.0 from the Version list (2). (This is the version of the servlet specification to be supported.)

                                                        … and then …

                                                        Clear the Web Application check box. (This check box was selected automatically when you selected Application Server. Because we already have a separate module for developing the web interface, we don’t need web application development support in the module that we are creating.)