jeapostrophe

5 ms·

1.
by jeapostrophe 6mo ago
I agree that it is very exhausting
2.
by jeapostrophe 6mo ago
Yea, I think it will be totally useless to switch at that level and instead it will be about reviewing the work more effectively. I think I would believe in the more "autonomous Claude" systems in that world.
3.
by jeapostrophe 6mo ago
I agree. This is what has worked for the past few weeks and I want to share. Maybe I will regret my life choices. If I'm still doing it next year, that will be something different to say. But I want to try to help and share before I re
4.
by jeapostrophe 6mo ago
Ask Claude ;) Right now it is hard-coded to run `claude --resume <uuid>` but there's a natural abstraction to use a different script to start the Claude session. If you're being sarcastic, I love you anyways.
5.
by jeapostrophe 6mo ago
Whether multi-tasking is good or bad, I think that if you're "waiting for Claude" at all, you're going to be multi-tasking or staring into space. I try to stare into space when I'm pumping gas, but I don't want
6.
by jeapostrophe 6mo ago
LOTs of key bindings.
7.
by jeapostrophe 6mo ago
Amen. Making the checking painless and easy to do is a major boon. There's a spectrum of "checking is easy": the compiler telling you the code doesn't compile is the easiest, but doesn't capture "is this the pr
8.
by jeapostrophe 6mo ago
My personal experience matches this. When I'm "succeeding", I am at the 5-to-7 minute cycle time and when I (or Claude) are failing, there's constant attention and no ability to switch away. My human programming experien
9.
by jeapostrophe 6mo ago
I've gone through a bunch of different processes learning how to use Claude. Giving it large tasks that take 40 minutes basically always fails for me. Giving it small tasks that take 30s to a minute feels like it is my typist and not a
10.
by jeapostrophe 6mo ago
I disagree. My workflow is built around reviewing what it produces and trying to build a process where it is effective to do that. I definitely can't and don't watch edits as they go by because it is too fast, but I want to easily
11.
by jeapostrophe 6mo ago
My tool supports doing many, but I find it hard to use it for much more than 3 or 4 concurrent projects. I've tried more than that open and I fail. I find that 3 project with 2 or 3 concurrent tasks at the same time works best for me.
12.
Don't Wait for Claude(jeapostrophe.github.io)
28 points by jeapostrophe 6mo ago|63 comments
13.
by jeapostrophe 11y ago
Extra CSS can be added when running Scribble: http://docs.racket-lang.org/scribble/config-style.html?q=css
14.
by jeapostrophe 11y ago
The request-post-data/raw function is in the docs: http://docs.racket-lang.org/web-server/http.html?q=post-data...
15.
by jeapostrophe 11y ago
The issues you mention are all alleviated by the stateless continuations which do not store state on the server and allow various ways of closing off the session from simply having the URL. The documentation discusses the features of the We
16.
by jeapostrophe 13y ago
Let's put that on a bumper sticker :)
17.
by jeapostrophe 13y ago
Certainly, but most math proofs aren't "rigorous proofs" by any stretch.
18.
by jeapostrophe 13y ago
Syntactic validity is not a property of a program, but a property of a piece of text that makes it a program. In any case, the point is that type systems purport to identify some amount of "goodness" in a program. I agree that &qu
19.
by jeapostrophe 13y ago
If you really believe this, you should try to translate any contemporary (published) mathematical proof into a real logic, like Coq. It is hard and people earn PhDs doing this because most proofs are so intuition heavy in the first place.
20.
by jeapostrophe 13y ago
We should not throw out mathematics, but we should recognize that most mathematical proofs are not based on logic, but human intuition in the first place. Human intuition and wisdom are valuable and lay the foundation for all that we do and
21.
by jeapostrophe 13y ago
I suggest reading about progressive types: http://blog.brownplt.org/2012/09/01/progressive-types.html
22.
by jeapostrophe 13y ago
That's not a counter-example. I'm not saying that Java doesn't allow syntax that might look like "number + string", just that it does not actually add them, like C does where: 3 + "4" means something very
23.
by jeapostrophe 13y ago
It's true. The theorems are a statement about the logics. Most of the time when you design a logic, you get to "choose" which case you'll get. Most people choose "true but not provable" because that's a li
24.
by jeapostrophe 13y ago
This is Jay. Arc macros are like define-syntax-rule macros in Racket. dsr is great for lots of things, but sometimes you need more power. In any case, this post is really about what's going on in the pattern matching and macro template
25.
by jeapostrophe 13y ago
As a Racket author, I can tell you that we provided them with a hack to enable mutation on arbitrary conses, so they can upgrade whenever they wish, and I don't know whether they have or not.
26.
by jeapostrophe 13y ago
This is the author. I agree very much with both of you. I assemble all the tiles into texture atlases (and earlier post discusses the technique) and then use a fairly simple shader to render. If you look in the gb/graphics directory [1], th