I would add that Delphi still follows along, enough for an yearly conference in Germany, and that C# since getting Native AOT and the low level programming improvements, is close enough to Modula-3 design.
There is Swift as well, although quite far from Wirthian compile times.
The argument is that the ergonomics of using Python are worth the squeeze of learning two languages. Are the ergonomics of using Zig really enough to justify replacing Python on the happy path, or would it end up replacing just C?
I find Python extremely unergonomical. Sure, it's nice to read (pseudocode, yay!) and sure, its library ecosystem is beyond amazing.
But... the LSPs I've tried (and I've tried a bunch!) are all atrocious: false positives and false negatives galore. Perhaps I'm spoiled by LSPs from languages with better type systems. Our code is strewn with (to me) mysterious comments such as `# NOQA 1234` which my colleague uses to make his Python tooling work with the codebase. I'm used to languages like Elm or Gleam in which a LSP error means there is an actual problem with your code, and a lack of a LSP error means the code will compile and run.
That's actually a great argument for Nim[0]. Easy interop with C, native-speed performance, and a syntax very close to Python in both readability and how quickly you can get something working.
Batteries included, automatic memory management without a conventional GC and metaprogramming - is a really cool combination.
Aggh if only its LSP was better! I have always run into issues when using Helix with it (it kept crashing), and I'm absolutely spoiled by good LSPs in other languages :(
Wish I had the time and skill to actually contribute to the LSP, if you have ever used Nim it's a seriously underrated language.
Araq the Nim creator is working on a rewrite of the Nim compiler called Nimony that'll become Nim 3.
It's making fast progress and will provide the basis for a proper LSP! Nimony already supports incremental compilation and parallel which are key pieces for good fast LSP.
it is my second choice next to Zig and does have a lot of cool features, for sure.
The nice thing is that all these languages feature easy C interop so you can use a C FFI as the interface between them if you want to experiment with, for example, writing a module in Nim
Is this really a hard problem? Rendering some text with coloring?
I believe we're just making everything harder than it needs by constraining it to a browser interface. This would be trivial as a terminal application written in native code.
> I’m fairly certain if you give any substitution cypher to an LLM it will decipher the message.
*with sufficiently long cyphertext
You can construct encoding in the way that every 2-5 words will use a brand new different key. Remember, Unicode is big enough to fit over 10000 English alphabets.
You can see the full work in his other blog post[0]. There you can clearly see that red circles coincide with vertical blue lines on the graph. And the very fine print in the bottom left corner explains that "Displayed years indicate when Coffee Maker computers were built". Overlapping the red points with title text is probably just a stylistic choice.
If you're already a tmux expert then zellij is probably no big deal, and the "written in rust" part is more of a red-herring than the headline.
Firstly, it doesn't conflict with Ctrl-A by default (but I think that's actually `screen`), second it has mouse support, floating window, saved layouts, stacked tabs, session picker/manager, and take a look at the configuration mechanism: https://github.com/zellij-org/zellij/blob/main/zellij-utils/...
...for some reason it's just feels "super-sensible", comfortable, and allows a lot of flexibility.
The concept of "booting layouts" (a very poor-man's `docker compose` ;-) is really interesting and powerful:
...and I've got like a total of like 1.5hrs of zellij usage under my belt.
I've never been one to be super attached to screen/tmux, tried out byobu... none of them clicked in the same way with power, ease, and flexibility that zellij felt like it provided right away.
Again: this may be telling a vim user about the power of emacs, in which case just nod and smile and go about your day, but since these terminal multiplexers are effectively "just UX", then a "slightly different UX" may end up being in actuality the whole compelling product!
Handwriting or using a typewriter is great if you're writing something solely for enjoyment of the process. But if you want to store, organize and use any of your writing in the future - you have to go digital.
Program testing can be used to show the presence of bugs, but never to show their absence! Dijkstra (1970) "Notes On Structured Programming"
LLM generated code is garbage, not because it writes obvious errors. But because it lacks any kind of reasoning - Claude will gladly write you a solution for a problem you never had. Good luck fixing these kind of issues that will never be catched by tests.
It's arguably the closest modern language (with a sizeable community) to the Wirthian languages.
reply