Who doesn't like grey-on-slightly-darker-grey for readability?

The best thing I ever told Claude to do was "Swear profusely when discussing code and code changes". Probably says more about me than Claude, but it makes me snicker.

A lot of the complaints about these tools seems to revolve around their current lack of ability to innovate for greenfield or overly complex tasks. I would agree with this assessment in their current state, but this sentiment of "I will only use AI coding tools when they can do 100% of my job" seems short-sighted.

The fact of the matter, in my experience, is that most of the day to day software tasks done by an individual developer are not greenfield, complex tasks. They're boring data-slinging or protocol wrangling. This sort of thing has been done a thousand times by developers everywhere, and frankly there's really no need to do the vast majority of this work again when the AIs have all been trained on this very data.

I have had great success using AIs as vast collections of lego blocks. I don't "vibe code", I "lego code", telling the AI the general shape and letting it assemble the pieces. Does it build garbage sometimes? Sure, but who doesn't from time to time? I'm experienced enough notice the garbage smell and take corrective action or toss it and try again. Could there be strange crevices in a lego-coded application that the AI doesn't quite have a piece for? Absolutely! Write that bit yourself and then get on with your day.

If the only thing you use these tools for is doing simple grunt-work tasks, they're still useful, and dismissing them is, in my opinion, a mistake.

The vast majority of engineers aren't refusing to use AI until it can do 100% of their job. They are just sick of being told it already can, when their direct experience contradicts that claim.

For those interested in self-hosting, here's a site that maintains a collection of self-hostable services.

https://selfh.st

That website lists Hugo, the static site generator. What kind of self-hostable service does Hugo provide??? Confusing info like this makes me doubt the rest of the entries on that page.

The comment you replied to said it was a site about "self-hostable services". The site doesn't claim to be just about "self-hostable services".

How do you host Hugo? I understand that you can host a site generated by hugo, but how do you host Hugo itself?

I can tell you that technically Hugo has to be somewhere you control to generate a website, but I don't see the point in that discussion.

The list I can see on the site seems to be of tools you can self host or can help you create something that you can self host. That's it. It doesn't make sense to blame a site because a comment on HN didn't correctly describe the content of the website... like, the problem is the comment, not the site.

Reminds me of the Acts of Gord, but with less malice.

https://www.actsofgord.com/

But why not 'Thickel'?? It was right there!

Because "thnickel" is funnier.

Too close to thinckels. You might order the wrong ones.

Shades of "you need a thneed"

Because it's a pun on his name, I would think.

THeo NICHOLS -> THNICHOLS -> THNICKELS

... no?

I cribbed these from someplace - slightly different approach:

  ###################################################################
  # Add directory to path
  pathadd() {          
      newelement=${1%/}
      if [ -d "$1" ] && ! echo $PATH | grep -E -q "(^|:)$newelement($|:)" ; then
          if [ "$2" = "after" ] ; then
              PATH="$PATH:$newelement"
          else         
              PATH="$newelement:$PATH"
          fi
      fi
  }
 
  ###################################################################
  # Remove directory from path
  pathrm() {
      PATH="$(echo $PATH | sed -e "s;\(^\|:\)${1%/}\(:\|\$\);\1\2;g" -e \
      's;^:\|:$;;g' -e 's;::;:;g')"
  }

Do any of these guard against an empty value on either side ?

"export PATH=$DIR:$PATH - That particular pattern is way too common, and is very dangerous if you consider the case when [$DIR or] $PATH (or whatever your variable is, like $LD_LIBRARY_PATH) isn’t set. Then, the value will be :/path/to/dir, which usually means both /path/to/dir and the current directory, which is usually both unexpected behaviour and a security concern."

I'm surprised both the blog post and all the other comments don't mention how it should have logic to check if the item exists in the path before adding it. Otherwise you get duplicates added everytime you source your config.

Your function does that so +1. Though I'd use

    [[ $PATH =~ "(^|:)$newelement($|:)" ]] 

over grep -q but it functions the same.

Another option is to set the full $PATH value explicitly instead of doing an add thing for each directory. This avoids duplicates and the extra logic, but maybe isn't as convenient.

Compiler Design. Dragon book and all. Learned a ton from that class

If you're patient, you can just hold 'up' anywhere and it will eventually clear the level. It started taking quite awhile at level 20 or so - I got bored and gave up.