mikolajw

I also use backtrack-free cursive too for my own personal notes, by not dotting i, j, and just not stopping to press pen when moving to dash t.

One problem I had was that dotless i tended to blend in with neighboring characters, e.g. "in" looked like "m", "ij" looked like "y". I solved that by elongating "i" downwards. This made it unintelligible for other people, so I only use it in my own personal notes.

I think you can do that with undoredo by doing all the following:

- Having one history bistack for each user or permissions group to enforce ownership;

- Giving each new object's a unique key (e.g. from a counter, possibly a persistent one) to prevent key collisions by avoiding ever trying to fill the same container slot more than once;

- Storing the objects in a sparse container such as BTreeMap, BTreeSet, HashMap, HashSet to avoid visiting emptied slots when iterating over all the elements.

I have not tested this, but it could be a nice case to add to examples.

(having used a bullet list I immediately feel the need to explain myself: this message was whole written by hand)

To answer the usual question these days: the library, including the README which you can read, was written by hand, without LLM usage. I only played somewhat with Codex later on when creating derive macros and with some tests and examples, but that was all also highly manual.

Thanks for correcting me, I should have read the interview more carefully.

>That's not how you title software. You don't say "The Photoshop" or "The EMACS."

Nitpick: The Sims, The WELL, TheFacebook are all attestable. But yeah, fair.

>The number one association most of the population of Earth have with the word "GIMP" is:

>Bring Out the Gimp - Pulp Fiction (9/12) Movie CLIP (1994) HD:

I suppose that here you didn't mean that most of the population of Earth watched and understood the English version of Pulp Fiction, or that the majority of people in the world will associate the word "gimp" with anything else than the graphics editor (certainly neither would be true), but that the second most-common association among all anglophones taken together after the GIMP editor itself is the Gimp character from Pulp Fiction.

>"Is this derogatory or offensive?" is a basic localization question that is constantly asked in many languages. Yes, including Arabic.

While it is pragmatic to chose new names to be appealing to members of dominant societies (I do that too), it is problematic when dominant groups view themselves as entitled to that, which is the case here, and which is why we have this discussion.

>The intent was offense.

First, I am not aware of any evidence that there was an intent to offend. The only source for etymology I know here is an old interview with one of the original developers where he said that he blended the words GNU and Image Manipulation Program, and soon afterwards realized that he heard that word before in a film. There was no suggestion there that he wanted to upset others.

And even if the name was really intended to be edgy, the current developers, who have inherited the codebase from the original authors over two decades ago, view it differently and dissasociate themselves from that etymology in the FAQ. This should be sufficient to close this line of reasoning.

Finally, regarding adoption: I can't tell for sure what it is like for graphics editors, but I haven't ever seen anyone not using SRAM memory and OSRAM lightbulbs in Poland because their names are sordophonic to Polish verbs about defecation (in fact, because of that OSRAM is the only lightbulb brand that I can name from memory). Or even anyone complaining about that, apart from being amused. And I wouldn't dare to demand for these names to change just because they have dirty associations in my language when read a certain way.

There are over 7000 languages in the world, around half of them dying or having already died due to linguistic domination, in large part English, each with its own set of culturally sensitive words.

To follow the above mode of reasoning without advantaging one or few languages, you would have to change an enormous amount of words in all languages, if not basically all. This is obviously not feasible.

If GIMP was a dirty word in a Native American language, or a native African language, there would be no debate. That we are debating this at all is because English has privileged status due to the Anglo-Saxon hegemony.

Hence, you are expecting us to give special, privileged treatment to the linguistic sensitivities of your dominant culture. Which is unfair, especially historically, because the hegemony was achieved by mass land steal and many genocides, which we shouldn't be rewarding by allowing further claims.

So yes, it should be expected from an adult anglophone to tolerate the existence of sordophones, words that are dirty in their dialect but not in others, especially in an international, multilingual setting. This is what it means to abstain from linguistic imperialism. This is what it means to tolerate and respect other cultures.

And to enforce tolerance, indeed it may be needed to view those who fail at this as childish.

I feel somewhat sorry to say this, but I need to be assertive here.

>how they are percieved by the outside world

The vast majority of the outside world does not perceive the name the way you do. Even the majority of English users doesn't, as most of them learned standard English as second language at school without being taught vulgar Anglo-American slang.

If you want to pursue linguistic sensitivity, the just direction is against anglophone domination, even if impractical. We should be taking power away from the most powerful and redistributing it back to the weak, not the other way around.

So, it is the anglophones who should stop calling people using a nasty word instead of expecting international, multilingual communities to adapt to their culture.