froh

Demo-sce-nes (dai-moh-ske-nes), the famous geek philosopher...

is this cmd or does it also work with pwsh / Powershell?

I'd love to see a pelican riding a bicycle, I don't know why.

scientific progress is facts plus people, people researching and people evaluating, judging the science.

people dynamics matter.

and we can and do _scientifically_ look at that part of "doing science".

for example in social sciences.

and their findings, and then attempts to remedy injustice uncovered in these findings are what drove and drives approaches for remedy, "policies".

these _of course_ are disputed by those benefitting from the status quo, like publishers as part of the top wealth percentile.

so far so obvious.

what baffles me is that some call injustice "issue du jour", when it is much older than Christianity.

even more so when as we found out taking care benefits business.

and I dare going one step further: if we don't discuss social implications of science and tech, the AI gives the wealthy cheap access to smarts, while it takes smarts the lever for a good life.

to me, the advent of AI puts the question of societal justice _in science_, in intelligence work, front and center.

yes, and by amd which announced to integrate it with their hardware.

upstream has created hatchling for the other part of uv indeed

because a package manager manages packages, while a formatter formats source code and a type checker checks types.

the type check is background process for lsp and a quality gate in your process.

formatting likewise with a stronger Fokus on pre-commit

packaging (and build for packaging) may or may not be gated with the former two but it's a (pre)release and deployment activity.

isn't "coordinated disclosure" exactly about keeping, embargoing, a secret?

I think the difference is between communicating to a purely mechanical being versus communicating to an intelligent entity: unlike programs, which are purely formal languages, we write textbooks and papers in a mix of human language and formal language. often we introduce "just formal enough" notations. and the intelligent reader will read in-between, inter legere literally means just that: reading in between. filling the gaps, connecting the dots.

and in practice I find it _very_ effective to express key ideas with some formal language where applicable. a little ebnf here, some snippets of python or prolog there or other languages there. and I find llms wonderful at filling in the dots and, and that's the topic here, to translate our semi formal conversation into rigorous, formal language.

and I dare one step further: I also find llms useful in formulating and refining technical proposals, for human peer review and llm driven implementation, and of course these proposals mix natural language prose with semi-formal and formal detail. think PEP-12 and PEP-1 style. and these then get work packages which each loop in a spec as in sdd.

seems to work just fine so far :-)

can't you explicitly express a catch-all in a check?

edit: I don't know rust. in other languages he's such catch all patterns exist and you have to either capture each possible value explicitly or you express "here in this fu, I take care of these and all others I do that..."

add to that

- using groups "(" .. ")" in replacement "\"i

- character ranges "[" .. "]"

- character classes "[:" .. ":]"

- multiline match

- ignore case

- beginning / end of line / word

there was a wonderful wisiwyg xml editor that rendered the FO life from your xml using your xslt. syntext serna. they even open sources it in their hopes it would see some pick up.

alas that whole xml bubble moved into a business cloud, driven up there by complexity.

I think the biggest mistake of the consortia was to move from dsssl, the lisp, to xslt in unmaintainably arcane xml syntax, for a programming language that is.

does anyone here have some insight on why they went from dsssl to xslt? "because we can"?