101–110 of 112 posts
If you're going that far, why not build something for a VR/AR setup?
Alpha release builds an AR app to pull code, render in space.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I once set out to learn Emacs, but the stupidly multi-key bindings for very basic things (Ctrl-X Ctrl-C to copy, etc) turned me off. Deep and logical my ass.
I once set out to learn Vi, but the absurd modal editing and convoluted key combinations for basic tasks made it a nightmare. Efficient and logical, my ass!
I have more respect for vi's key bindings though because they are, in fact, quite efficient. But I only know enough vi for basic editing.
A demo video in Japanese https://www.youtube.com/live/rk6-2Y3zU0A?si=2Og1szp6WWKlER-S...
Japanese is my favourite written language, I love English but I'm definitely jealous of the beautiful glyphs and the vertical writing. From what I've seen, vertical writing is often poorly supported in software though, which is a shame.
Why English in particular? English uses Latin script pretty randomly.
-- sincerely your Ptoughneigh
THIS! So much this!! With the jump from 2D screen to AR-based UI, we have the chance to re-think all of the conventions that have gripped UI/UX design over the past few decades. How many apps would benefit from being able to visualize data in a 3D space? How many new ways could we interact with computers, if we could reach out and touch things? Text editing, video editing, image editing (visualizing Photoshop layers?…
This might interest you too: https://github.com/tikimcfee/LookAtThat
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This might interest you too: https://github.com/tikimcfee/LookAtThat
This seems to be Swift-exclusive, but the idea is absolutely there. Imagine when this gets expanded to any codebase. Imagine all the spaghetti code you could visualize as real spaghetti!
Would love something like this in VS Code so I could smoothly zoom in and out of my code rather than scrolling and clicking tabs.
Say more! How does the existing zoom function not do enough?
Likely not technically feasible at the moment (without sacrificing font quality and too many other features of code editing)
Japanese is my favourite written language, I love English but I'm definitely jealous of the beautiful glyphs and the vertical writing. From what I've seen, vertical writing is often poorly supported in software though, which is a shame.
I'm partial to Mongolian.. It also has top to bottom but has an Arabic lace like cursive style which makes it flow much better than Japanese. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mongolian_script
https://www.cjvlang.com/Writing/writmongol/websitesinmongolb...
Example:
Japanese is my favourite written language, I love English but I'm definitely jealous of the beautiful glyphs and the vertical writing. From what I've seen, vertical writing is often poorly supported in software though, which is a shame.
> I love English Why English in particular? English uses Latin script pretty randomly. -- sincerely your Ptoughneigh
Earlier quoted context omitted.
As an emacs user I genuinely believe vim bindings are better, but emacs is more powerful than at least vim (I can’t speak for neovim). Edit: and I really do wish there was more unbiased content relating to the pros and cons of either.
Emacs has a very long tail indeed of elisp extensions which Neovim has yet to fully catch up with. Neovim is well on its way however, and uses a programming language which many people already know and which is in any case familiar and easy to pick up. Lua has its quirks, elisp is pretty weird even for a Lisp (credit where credit is due, the elisp documentation is fantastic). I've used Emacs off and on for years, and…
I’m under the impression emacs performance will improve but agree it’s an issue, particularly on very long lines - my understanding is that any modes must recalculate things (font colors, etc) on every change and recalculate major parts of the file. Iirc emacs 30 implements treesitter and a few other things which should improve performance, but some issues still undoubtedly remain.