• 4 Posts
  • 106 Comments
Joined 11 months ago
cake
Cake day: December 16th, 2024

help-circle






  • They are utility, as long as you don’t have a theme that randomly picks a new colour every time the token type changes.

    It’s a bit like having a bunch of different tools or utensils in separate colours. Even if the drawer is messy and the colour ultimately arbitrary, you can pick out utensils because you’re habituated to looking for a given colour.

    Just stick to one theme and you’ll get the same thing but for code. Theme hopping kills your habituation, and resets you to the “I can tell that these are different things because the colours are different” stage.


  • The stance coupled with the garish background colour reminds me of how Pike also had a very dismissive view of using colours for syntax highlighting, and then later opened up about having a kind of colourblindness.

    Both of them also seem to mean colour when they write syntax highlighting. That’s just one typographic tool among many. We also use bold, italics, underline, and even whitespace to highlight programming syntax. We could write a lot of programming languages as if they were prose, but we don’t. People hate that and call it “minified code”.

    Humans also have a great capacity for colour vision, much better than most mammals. Some of us are even tetrachromats. Our colour vision is basically a free channel of information: It’s always on; we don’t have to concentrate to be able to discern most colours. When things in nature are more colourful than usual, like leaves in fall or a colourful sunset, we don’t find it tiresome; we find it refreshing and seek it out. But when our built environment becomes all shades of grey, we tend to find it depressing.

    But humans are also different in many ways here. Better or worse colour vision is one thing, but some are also prone to getting overstimulated; others require more than average stimuli. We have great selective attention as a species, but again, individuals vary. There’s no one syntax highlighting that works for everyone.

    Ultimately we should just find some syntax highlighting that we find generally pleasant, and then stick with it until we reflexively use the information carried in those colours. Use habit formation for our benefit.

    Tonsky may enjoy his garish background colour and have found a mushy colourscheme that works for him, but he’s also way off base in his assessment of colourschemes in general.





  • One more puzzle piece here is that du won’t report on files that have been marked for deletion but are still held on to by some process. There’s an lsof incantation to list those, but I can’t recall it off the top of my head.

    It used to be part of sysadmin work to detect the processes that held on to large files if df reports that you’re running out of space, and restart them to make them let go of the file. But I haven’t done that in ages. And if you restarted the host OS that should have taken care of that.

    I assume you also know how to prune container resources.





  • That’s interesting I hadn’t thought about the JSON angle! Do you mean that you can actually use jq on regular command outputs like ls -l?

    No, you need to be using a tool which has json output as an option. These are becoming more common, but I think still rare among the GNU coreutils. ls output especially is unparseable, as in, there are tons of resources telling people not to do it because it’s pretty much guaranteed to break.


  • I’ve been using fish (with starship for prompt) for like a year I think, after having had a self-built zsh setup for … I don’t know how long.

    I’m capable of using awk but in a very simple way; I generally prefer being able to use jq. IMO both awk and perl are sort of remnants of the age before JSON became the standard text-based structured data format. We used to have to write a lot of dinky little regex-based parsers in Perl to extract data. These days we likely get JSON and can operate on actual data structures.

    I tried nu very briefly but I’m just too used to POSIX-ish shells to bother switching to another model. For scripting I’ll use #!/bin/bash with set -eou pipefail but very quickly switch to Python if it looks like it’s going to have any sort of serious logic.

    My impression is that there’s likely more of us that’d like a less wibbly-wobbly, better shell language for scripting purposes, but that efforts into designing such a language very quickly goes in the direction of nu and oil and whatnot.




  • esa@discuss.tchncs.detoLinux@lemmy.ml*Permanently Deleted*
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    14
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    No, but the weirdos who insist on spelling it “SystemD” always seem to hate systemd.

    systemd is pretty great. I tend to start long-running processes as user services, and I’ve even taken to starting some apps that give an old laptop trouble with systemd-run and a slice with some memory restrictions. Easy peasy, works great, all declarative, no wibbly-wobbly shell scripts involved.




  • The fourth … appendage on the left hand is being used like a thumb, and doesn’t have any indication of knuckle even though it’d be the most bent finger if it was one. I’d say we can see four fingers on the right hand, while the left is in an indeterminate slop state where it’s only partially a comic/Disney three-finger hand, with one extra slop appendage that’s not clearly either thumb or finger.