hallettj

I did not realize nano implemented syntax highlighting!

This is what I use. Or if you don’t need image/PDF embedding or mobile support then VimWiki is a similar solution that is FOSS.

Well I might be hooked. It didn’t take me long to reproduce the niceties in Nushell I’m used to from my zsh config. Some of the important parts were setting up zoxide with a key binding for interactive mode, switching on vi key bindings, setting up my starship prompt.

Home Manager is preconfigured for the above integrations which made things easier.

One feature that is missing that I like to use is curly brace expansion to produce multiple arguments. For example,

$ mv *.{jpg,jpeg}

Unless there is a way to do something like this in Nushell that I haven’t seen yet?

Something I enjoyed was automating a sequence of steps I’ve been running a lot lately due to a program that often partially crashes,

def nkill [name_substring] {
  ps | where name =~ $name_substring | each { |p| kill $p.pid; $p }
}

I realized after writing this that I basically recreated killall -r. But it’s nice that it was so easy to make a custom command to do a very specific thing. And my version gives me a nice report of exactly what was killed.

Thanks for making this post OP! When I’ve heard mentions of Nushell I’m the past I think I conflated it with Powershell, and wrote it off as a Windows thing. (Maybe because it’s introduced as being “like Powershell”.) But now that I see that it’s cross-platform I’m enjoying digging into it!

I think the best way to get an idea is to look at feature lists for fancy shells like zsh or fish. But in short there are a number of things a good shell can do to help to execute commands faster and more easily. Stuff like autocompletions which make you faster, and also make things more discoverable; fuzzy searching/matching; navigating command history; syntax highlighting which helps to spot errors, and helps to understand the syntax of the command you’re writing.

I totally agree.

Right now I’m on a new project with a teammate who likes to rebase PR branches, and merge with merge commits to “record a clean history of development”. It’s not quite compatible with the atomic-change philosophy of conventional commits. I’m thinking about making a case to change style, but I’ve already failed to argue the problem of disruption when rebasing PR branches.

Lol this is what I was thinking too. The junior dev is also a black box. AI automation seems more like delegating than programming to me.

I get fatigued too! At the end of an especially busy day of coding I have trouble forming sentences for a bit until I take some time to rest. Programming is complicated, and all that mental work literally uses up calories, and fatigues brain cells. Have you heard of the waterfall illusion? The short version is if you watch stuff moving down for a while your downward-motion-detecting cells get tired, and become less active which which messes with your ability to perceive not-moving-upward things for a minute. Your other brain cells get tired too - but it doesn’t take long to recover if you take a break.

Yes, if you don’t plan to pull updates then you’re covered

You’ll get conflicts if you pull changes from the original repo any time the deleted files have upstream changes. After you record a merge resolution (presumably by deleting them again) you won’t get conflicts until the next time those files change upstream.

If you submit a pull request part of its changes will be deleting the files from the original repo.

OTOH if you delete the files you can always undo that later with git restore --source upstream/main <deleted file paths>. You can restore them in a branch only if you do want to submit a pull request, but leave the files deleted in your own main branch.