for the minimal use case this exists as well. https://github.com/crigler/dtach

idk if it will. it’s not adding scripting to documents(which already exists), it’s allowing a webpage that you’ve opened, that is already running code, embed a libreoffice document and control it.

unless you’re uploading your documents to a webpage and it’s stealing them or something of that form, I don’t think there’s much if any new security threat

this, evil is the real 4th generation vi

this is neat but also is a closed source extension. I use https://github.com/Wilfred/difftastic which doesn’t do quite as much and doesn’t integrate outside of git’s diff, but is still significantly better than nothing

that’s not a one letter template literal, that’s built in python syntax. it only has combinations of u r and f and no user defined option. f makes it templated

just stick a verification task in ci. if I have to check if the format matches the standard in a code review instead of reviewing meaningful things my time is being wasted

the codebase readability certainly suffers, and this isn’t the only case of shenanigans like this

found the following in our codebase the other day.

while(booleanFlag)
    return;

thhere wasn’t more in the loop body, that was it. the loop conditional does exist and it can hurt you.

if you’re copypasting you’re not using the code reuse tools of your component library. the nesting in normal css is component nesting with tailwind. and if you’re copypasting things that aren’t just the same component styles but something else shared, it’s just a string you can stick it in a variable.

idk if nesting is the reason people used tailwind. imo it’s more that css itself is a lot of complexity and overhead to write if you already have nesting and reuse in whatever you’re using to produce html, ex react. I’d rather not have to maintain a css tree and a component tree when it can all be colocated.

writing raw html? yeah tw doesn’t make any sense

or if you really wanted qt, using java qt bindings: https://github.com/OmixVisualization/qtjambi

linting config itself wouldn’t be defined there, and it would be verified in ci and such, but a setting to tell vscode which linter and extension it should use to show warnings would be.

modern languages may have their own way for configuration but they don’t have a way to bind it to the list of vscode tasks and define how to run a debugger, which is the part that gets stored.

it’s easy to go overboard with extension suggestions, but I don’t think adding an extension for linter used, extension for formatter used, and any languages used if there’s a definitive extension.

My team is split between visual studio, vscode, and I use emacs. we have config for both vs and vscode in our repos since it makes working on a new project so much nicer and means we aren’t just sharing editor configs through side channels instead. it doesn’t do anything to me if I have editor config for an IDE I don’t use in the repo, but it makes it easier for someone new to jump in with a sort of same environment immediately

but if there’s a bug I’ll know exactly which line to look at

that doesn’t sound right, it’s so much smaller if it’s just one line

source?

bc nu does everything pwsh does, but without the odd and verbose syntax. their exceptions and error codes are two different systems and don’t make sense by default. instead of making shell cmds easy to parse I find myself having to use dotnet versions of things, which would be fine if the syntax for that wasn’t so terrible. nu still feels like a unix shell for the most part.

pwsh has its place, especially since it’s default. I’ve written plenty of pwsh scripts at work for ci and the like. I can get over the verbose naming in a text editor. using it from a repl isn’t my favorite experience

I love alternative shells. my shell has been set to fish and zsh for about a year each, xonsh for a few years, and now nushell for a couple years, and I think that’s probably my ranking as well.

fish and zsh are both nicer than bash, but they don’t give you as much as xonsh and nu do. you get nice completion and configuration and such, but it’s still a shell when it comes to the programming tasks.

I don’t want just a shell, I want a programming language with a good repl that makes it easy to deal with commands. xonsh and nushell both do that.

my major problem with xonsh was that there was python syntax, and there was shell syntax. it didn’t feel great to interleave sh cmds and py fns. everything had to be parsed and then everything had to be formatted to go back into sh cmds. the standard library of sh cmds doesn’t really exist either. you either use the py version of libraries for paths/processes/whatever, or you call and parse the os version. the former seems like the intended one. I found myself having to find a pip package for whatever task.

nu solves all my problems with xonsh without sacrificing much. there isn’t really a split between nu commands and shell ones syntactically. parsing is easy, most cli things output data as lines, ascii tables, or have a json flag, and nu has nice ways to deal with all of those. nu commands generally work given a single element or a list or a full table if they make sense to. running a command on each element in a list and dealing with the output is easy as opposed to having to break your pipeline and write a for loop. they also have plenty of builtins and plugins so the things I generally want to parse are already done. ls returns a table, ps returns a table, I can pass lists into rm, etc. there’s community plugins for git so I don’t have to remember their syntax for searching for commits, I just query in nu. aws cli has a json flag so I can explore logs and such as nu data. and if I just want.

now downsides to nu. it’s not bash so you can’t just source whatever file that a command probably gives you, and there’s no source-bash like xonsh has, so you’re stuck translating it to nu. if it just sets env vars it’s not awful since you can just shell out to bash, but doesn’t work for more complicated. for things like python you have to make sure you use the correct tool to make your venv since builtin one doesn’t give you a nu file to load. not sure about support in other tools.

overall it’s great and not really that much learning, especially if you just use it like a shell to begin with. it’s not much commitment to try a new shell since you can still call scripts written in your previous one. I’d say try it and see how it goes

the pueue plugin isn’t perfect but it covered all my uses at least

worst case you’re parsing command output like you would in bash, so you’re not really worse off. I’ve got a handful of aliases that wrap commands I run often so I only dealt with parsing in the beginning. there are enough builtins that output structured data, or applications that have a json flag that it’s still useful.

speaking of powershell, it’s easy enough in nushell to write an alias that shells out to pwsh and calls ConvertTo-Json then from json on the nu side. that gives you plenty of extra commands that are structured, at least on windows

termux has some sort of gui support. I’ve never used it but that’d probably be your best bet