Neovim plugin authors forget one simple rule - plugins are supposed to plug in. Instead they write libraries.
I’ve been forking plugins I’m unwilling to get rid of and rewriting them to not require setup. It eliminates a lot of config complexity.
What worries me is that the same people that contribute to this mess are getting more and more involved with neovim core development. require.enable({ enabled = true}) is a recognizable [anti]pattern.
What the… But heat! Lasers make heat, space is insulating!
Who… why?..
What a life to be literate.
Citation needed
Don’t build a reactor that’s designed to produce bomb worthy fissile material then.
Best part is, my role can’t be eliminated, nor can my responsibilities be fulfilled by AI.
My job though? I’m just waiting for the axe to drop.
Some employees report outright refusing to use AI tools.
So having morals is sabotage now?
I fucking love seeing Americans implicitly declare the entire rest of the world to be non-humans in their attempts to seem progressive.
If you think patriarchy is white, I’ve got a bridge to sell you.
Game recognizes game.
It doesn’t, it shifts responsibility at best.
The Deal-Breaker
vim.pack has no event/filetype/command-based lazy loading. None. You either load at startup or you manually call :packadd in your config yourself.
Oh, so it’s sane and doesn’t try to bullshit it’s way out of plugin authors’ incompetence?
I’m sold!
The two are not mutually exclusive.
Sexual attractiveness also doesn’t mean sexual drive. One doesn’t need to be gay to understand that a man is sexually attractive in the way they find compelling. A desire to look good is all it takes.
For the company, the problem is already solved.
IIRC the goal wasn’t to have a loyal workforce, but to have an army that isn’t dependent on a small number of elites.
Basically “we won’t stop with the death of our officers, our soldiers can step up to the occasion”.
Senior backend engineering definitely doesn’t see 99% windows adoption rate.
Well, they do it Japanese style - by forcing developers to leave due to burnout.
I’m working with a legacy codebase for the last few months, where a simple PR often ends up crossing a 1000 lines count due to testing and commenting, and I can’t stop apologizing for those.
Yet there are people out there bragging about 10x changesets.
Kids the days… are entirely relatable.
I made my statement as a BDD/TDD practitioner.
The code goal of software engineering is not to deliver said code, but to deliver it in a framework that lets others—and consequently me in a week’s time—to contribute easily. This makes both future improvements and bug fixes easier.
Dumping a ~25000 lines changeset with a git history that’s almost designed to confuse is antithetical to both engineering and open source.
We didn’t. Which is an even better illustration to the point you’re making.