If I could code with a piece of music playing in the background and not lose focus means it's not worth listening at all.
Very rarely I use custom-filtered (brownish) noise to help with isolation. Perhaps some kind of Ambient or New Age would work too in such situations, but things I like in those genres require attention and not paying it would be absolutely disrespectful.
I listen to all kinds of music at my dayjob but only during specific activities that do not require much contemplation and I can mostly flow with the music and do the work in the background.
Though, I'm a musician and sound engineer, so my relationships with music in general might be a bit special.
Friend, you're missing out by applying a too-rigid filter. There's a bright-line distinction to be made between this use of music as a tool for cognitive enhancement, vs listening for valid reasons other than focus.
I'm a musician too, and a lifelong student and appreciator / afficianado of music across many genres. And I spend hours every workday listening to tracks from my "flowstate" playlist -- which tracks are excluded from my taste profile. Other use cases include music appreciation (close attention for pleasure), education / cultural literacy (close attention for analysis / learning), performance (close attention for reproduction, typically broken into segments / fragments), dancing (mixed attention, emphasis on rhythm and physical movement), relaxation (minimal attention), meditation (minimal attention), mood-setting / socialization (mixed attention), etc.
Judging a piece of music intended for one of these categories based solely on whether it's "worth listening to" or "[demanding of] respect" in the context of the wrong category will leave you impoverished in the other areas.
EDIT: P.S. That doesn't mean tolerating muzak! I recommend curating playlists limited to tracks that you can appreciate in a given appropriate, narrowed context. For example, here's my "flowstate"
playlist:
For a layperson it's clear that it's either "Writings" and "Talks", or "Readings" and "'Listenings", but CPP profeciency is in an inverse relation with being apt in taxonomy, it looks like.
I have a weird hobby: about once a year I go to the theory page [0] in pijul manual and see if they have fixed the TeX formatting yet.
You would think that if a better, more sound model of storing patches is your whole selling point, you would want to make as easy as possible for people who are interested in the project to actually understand it. It is really weird not to care about the first impression that your manual makes on a curious reader.
Currently, I'm about 6 years into the experiment.
Approximately 2 years in (about 4 years ago), I've actually went to the Pijul Nest and reported [1] the issue. I got an explanation on fixing this issue locally, but weirly enough, the fix still wasn't actually implemented on the public version.
I'll report back in about a year with an update on the experiment.
I'm surprised! Pijul has been discussed here on HN many, many times. My impression is that many people here were hoping that Pijul might eventually become a serious Git contender but these days people seem to be more excited about Jujutsu, likely because migration is much easier.
Git is so established now that it's sensible for alternative VCS to have a mode where they can imitate the Git protocol - or seven without that you can still checkout the latest version of your repo and git push that on a periodic basis.
Git is not a protocol, it is a data format. That only makes sense when your VCS system is similar enough to git to easily allow converting between the two representations.
It solves problems that you dont encounter if you are asking that question. I’ve lost a literal year or more of my life, in aggregate, to rebasing changes against upstream that could have been handled automatically by a sufficiently smart VCS.
An alternative explanation is that I already have a tool that helps me with these situations. The question was a bit rhetorical, because the vast majority of devs don't care what language many of their tools are written in or what algos are used.
A different example, Go's MVS algo can be considered much better for dependency management. What are your thoughts on the SAT solver being replaced in your preferred language tooling? It would mean the end of lock files
```
for HASH in $(cat all_changes.txt); do
pijul apply "$HASH"
pijul reset # sync working copy to channel state
git add -A
git commit -m "pijul change: $HASH"
done
```
git remote add origin git@github.com:you/pijul-mirror.git
git push -u origin main
From time to time, I do a 'pijul pull -a' into the pijul source tree, and I get a conflict (no local work on my part). Is there a way to do a tracking update pull? I didn't see one, so I toss the repo and reclone. What works for you in tracking what's going on there?
From time to time I get curious about Pijul, attempt to pull the Pijul repo from the nest, and encounter a no-workaround-possible bug in the network sync. I have never been able to do a fresh clone of Pijul.
It is very hard to take a project like this seriously.
The crux of the matter is that there's nothing that protects an open project besides reputation, and nowadays in the digital space it can be cheaply farmed.
Laws could help, but they only work when you undertake purposeful actions to be covered by them, like register a trademark, and it's never cheap.
Imagine you're in a local band playing shows. It's 3 month old and you have no issued records. A second band tighter with venues takes your name and starts performing under your moniker. You have no money to take that to court and good luck making a case. You can't do anything besides screaming on the web or, don't know, kicking a few butts. You change your name.
If by AI you mean the LLM-based tools common now, then I don't want the commits in PRs I'm going to review to bring any more noise than they already do. The human operator is responsible for every line, like they always were.
If by AI you mean non-supervised, autonomous conscience (as I believe the term has to be reserved for), then the answer is again no, as it's as responsible for the quality of its PRs as humans.
If the thing writing code is the former, but there's no human or responsible representative of the latter in the loop, then the code shouldn't be even suggested for consideration in a project where any people do participate. In such case there's no point in storing any additional information as the code itself doesn't have any value (besides electricity wasted to create it) and can be substituted on demand.
Commit comments are generally underused, though, as a result of how forges work, but that's another discussion.
Years ago replacing Notepad with an alternative was a given and everybody had their favourite. Before UTF everywhere you needed at least proper character encoding handling, other features followed.
Surprisingly, some of the projects such as AkelPad are still alive.
Win32 made things easier, as well as things like Delphi and Scintilla later.
Just checked my archives, and my own naive but functioning attempt measures whole whopping 36520 bytes, though not without the help of an executable packer, which was a fashion then.
Mostly works fine under Wine, though it is about the legal US drinking age.
Very rarely I use custom-filtered (brownish) noise to help with isolation. Perhaps some kind of Ambient or New Age would work too in such situations, but things I like in those genres require attention and not paying it would be absolutely disrespectful.
I listen to all kinds of music at my dayjob but only during specific activities that do not require much contemplation and I can mostly flow with the music and do the work in the background.
Though, I'm a musician and sound engineer, so my relationships with music in general might be a bit special.
reply