Readit NewsElixir has more contributors than just Jose (though he is the OG / creator / leader)
https://dashbit.co/#teamhttps://elixir-lang.org/development.html#teamhttps://github.com/elixir-lang/expert/graphs/contributors
IMO that contributes powerfully to the quality of the experiences of using any of the options.
That said, I consider `just` very language-agnostic and useful because of that, and I consider mix pretty bad at any workflow needs that isn't directly concerned with BEAM.
He seems to be saying he spent $350k making this. I guess it's some tooling for writing parsers.
He has this to say about Zed:
> Zed: Founded by Atom’s dev team, Zed was the rewrite that Atom always wanted to be able to do but couldn’t when Microsoft bought Github and made the executive decision to kill a product it might otherwise have had to compete with. Unfortunately Zed decided to do that rewrite in Rust. This has slowed their iteration speed, caused much of their dev effort to go to cross-platform support instead of innovation, cut them off from being able to offer their experience on the web, severely limited their hackability, and generally made theirs a niche tool for enthusiasts. What’s worse, their reliance on LSP — a product which believes that the presentation layer should be the primary abstraction layer — means their product is forever doomed to look like a VSCode knock-off. [1]
It's not clear to me how you could substantially replace the capabilities/benefits of what LSP provides with BABLR either.
- Decide your changes are perfect, so add a commit message to this one and then create a new one on to to carry on
- Decide you only want some of them so use `jj split -i` to select which ones you want and then it creates two commits - the stuff you want in a new named commit, and the stuff you didn't in a new working copy commit. This is the JJ workflow equivalent to `git add -p` adding to the staging area then committing
I am an extremely fervent believer in jj and use it exclusively since December '24, but I think it's useful to be accurate as possible for these kinds of trade offs. I don't use watchman snapshots specifically because of this downside.
Generally speaking I don't want a terminal multiplexer to be doing network IO of any sort, so I also didn't love it when they shipped "load WASM plugins from a non-checksummed arbitrary URL via your config file" in a previous release.