It was the tool with the least friction capable of making what I needed to make. I think an important rule for me is to choose not the most elaborate, fancy or feature-heavy tool, but rather the simplest one that’s capable of doing what I need for the project. Friction is the enemy of making multi-media projects, and I tend to become my own obstacle when choosing a needlessly complex tool for the job.

This is in stark contrast to something like Partiful, which is for absolutely everyone and no one simultaneously, like many apps and platforms. No signal. Just utility. Just an interface.

You don’t need Ollama, and frankly - I would recommend against using that on ethical grounds.

Tracking token costs is a trillions-of-rows-a-month data problem. You can't just stick that into whatever spreadsheet or even basic tool.

The fastest way to get started is to use Codex's built-in skill creator (which itself is also a skill).

A deliberately planted backdoor doesn’t have a CVE.

ChatModel

VectorStore

Embeddings

Retriever

Text splitters

Document Loaders.

Usinghypothes.is

Basically I wanted to merge every tiddler into one ORG file.

I'm rather concerned about adding svelte.config.js support to things that already have well established mechanisms for configuration.

Yes, precisely because I've been involved in maintaining codebases built without real full stack frameworks is why I say what I said.The problem we have in this industry, is that somebody reads these blog posts, and the next day at work they ditch the "legacy rails" and starts rewriting the monolith in sveltekit/nextjs/whatever because that's what he/she has been told is the modern way to do full stack.No need to say those engineers will quit 1 year later after they realize the mess they've created with their lightweight and simple modern framework.I've seen this too many times already.It is not about gatekeeping. It is about engineers being humble and assume it is very likely that their code is very unlikely to be better tested, documented, cohesive and maintained than what you're given in the real full stack frameworks.Of course you can build anything even in assembler if you want. The question is if that's the most useful thing to do with your company's money.

We standardize on a finite subset of JS (such as asm.js) — and avoid the endless struggle through future iterations of the JavaScript language, competing super-sets and transpilers

We believe good tools lead to excellent creations.

The answer should be: you write a language that compiles to Go’s IR.

One important other option is using another programming language as your IR! If you can compile (or perhaps more accurately transpile) your language into C, then you can leverage gcc (or clang, etc) into compiling that all the way down into machine code.

However, this would lead to further divergence. Tooling that is built around the assumptions imposed by template literals wouldn't work. It would undermine the meaning of template literals. It would be necessary to define how JSX behaves within the rest of the ECMAScript grammar within the template literal anyway.

This is valid javascript! Or harmony or es6 or whatever, but importantly, it's not happening outside the js environment. This also allows us to use our standard tooling: the traceur compiler knows how to turn jsx`<div>Hello</div>`; into the equivalent browser compatible es3, and hence we can use anything the traceur compile accepts!

Doesn't require the use of transpiler or modifications to all JS tooling ever invented.

Why struggle with custom Syntax DSLs when you can use one so widely supported?

It was only pragmatic to use a tool that basically gives you that all for free.

One key advantage of 'HTML-plus' languages is that you don't actually need tooling in order to be productive — most editors give you out-of-the-box support for things like syntax highlighting (though imperfect, as JavaScript expressions are treated as strings) and auto-closing tags. Tools like Emmet work with no additional setup. HTMLx should retain that benefit.

benefited from a shared set of tools for syntax highlighting, autocomplete, linting and so on.

many organizations have been burned by the high churn in JavaScript tooling, which sadly moves projects backwards as a part of moving the web forward

What I think we're lacking is proper tooling, or at least the knowledge of it. I don't know what most people use to write Git commits, but concepts like interactive staging, rebasing, squashing, and fixup commits are very daunting with Git on the CLI, unless you know really well what you're doing. We should do a better job at learning people how to use tools like Git Tower (to give just one example) to rewrite Git history, and to produce nice Git commits.

The free plan of ngrok allows only a single concurrent tunnel to be opened. Even though BroswerStack and Sauce Labs provide their own tunneling solution, we decided to go with ngrok, in order to provide a more generic solution. We happily upgraded to the $25/month business account following our excellent experience with the free account.

It’s known that Angular becomes slower with around 2,000 bindings due to the process behind dirty-checking. The less we can add to this limit the better, as bindings can add up without us really noticing it!

In version 1.4, bindToController gets even more powerful. When having an isolated scope with properties to be bound to a controller, we always define those properties on the scope definition and bindToController is set to true. In 1.4 however, we can move all our property binding definitions to bindToController and make it an object literal.

After some research, I found karma-ng-html2js-preprocessor, a npm package that does the above, all from the karma configuration

IcoMoon was also the first to solve a big problem with icon fonts: Compatibility with screen readers. By using the Private Use Area of Unicode, this problem was solved and almost every other icon font started to use the same encoding.