I disagree. You can't even create simple C++ inheritance examples because you don't have data inheritance. So basically classical OOP is out of the window.

That's the biggest difference to C++ and most mainstream languages, you simply can't do OOP (which in my books is a good thing) and it forces you more towards traits and composition.

This was and partly is the attitude you can find in german non-software businesses where software is gaining more and more influenxe. For example car manufacturing.

Im quite happy with my setup.

I have the stock git server on a vm, gitweb to view things in the browser and gitolite for basic permission management.

Very low tech, almost no maintenance necessary and I dont more for hosting personal projects

I had occasional problems with undo-tree (the tree broke occasionally), I've been using vundo for a while now and I'm a lot more happy with that.

The mark and diff functionality is great too.

Another day, another great Emacs package I’ve just learned about. This one’s going in the init.el for sure!

> Lay-offs, outsourcing, offshoring, now the concept of spending your whole working life at the same company feels like a fever dream

You are missing something here imo, very few companies actually increase pay (or to be more clear, show a clear way to get there) enough to make it attractive enough to stay there for long periods of time.

From my experience here in Germany the people staying at companies for a long time are those who don't focus on their career.

Moving around distributes knowledge making for a healthier economy overall. The alternative looks like Korean chaebols.

It's obviously not as easy as you make it sound, it was reverted since it broke some existing apps.

I can see it being useful for stuff like renaming files, splitting hpp/cpp files, doing renaming etc.

Yeah but using a different model for that? Ideally a skilled model that works with the IDE functionality/API would “solve” this issue.

I find this absolutely wild. From my experience Codex code quality is still not as good as a human so letting codex do smth and not verifying / cleaning up behind it will most likely result in lower code quality and possibly subtle bugs.

For upgrading frameworks and such there are usually not that many architectural decisions to be made, where you care about how exactly something is implemented. Here the OP could probably verify the build works, with all the expected artifacts quite easily.

What codex often does for this, write a small python script and execute that to bulk rename for example.

I agree that there is use for fast "simpler" models, there are many tasks where the regular codex-5.3 is not necessary but I think it's rarely worth the extra friction of switching from regular 5.3 to 5.3-spark.

According to the last comment in the issue it is already available for self hosted clients.