But that's the most important part. A repository without CI is basically dead.
The biggest challenge of this era is automated verification, and proper CI infrastructure is essential.
GitHub feels like what Hudson/Jenkins was some decades ago. Horrible, but the only one that did what it did.
I run probably hundreds of dollars of CI on GitHub per month. Except I don't pay a cent for it (all open source public repos). I can't just let that go, those workers do real work.
It's curious when agents remember traumatic events and replay them instead of avoiding them.
I was stuck on a task for a couple of days. Deleted the memory about some debugging sessions, thing just unlocked itself again. The harness was basically replaying the trauma over and over again.
I honestly think it's better to not have stateful stuff when working with agents.
The irony is that for compliance purposes you almost need statefulness — a $600 1099-NEC threshold or a $100K nexus threshold only makes sense if someone's tracking cumulative totals across sessions. Ephemeral agents are cleaner architecturally but they create a compliance blind spot.
I've found memories and state to be a mixed bag with LLMs. To the point I don't bother with long term memories - usually only short or medium-term session logs or task-focused docs.
In practical terms, "productivity" is any metric that people with power can manipulate (cheating numbers, changing narratives, etc) to affect behavior of others to their interests.
ALL OF IT is meaningless. It's a pointless discussion.
The full PDF is available for download. It's mostly a series of essays, so you can pick and choose and read nonlinearly. It's worth thinking about beyond nihilistic takes.
> ALL OF IT is meaningless. It's a pointless discussion.
That is a nihilistic take. That it's pointless and everything about the domain (measurement of productivity) is meaningless.
"Productivity" is no more made up of a concept than "good work". The fact that many attempts to measure it are quite dumb (e.g., the idea of using LOC as a metric) does not mean the whole idea is not worth considering or discussing.
> In practical terms, "productivity" is any metric that people with power can manipulate (cheating numbers, changing narratives, etc) to affect behavior of others to their interests.
Metrics can be gamed, and to me this is the deepest flaw in accepting that metrics can even tell something meaningful.
It is a nuanced discussion, and it's not entirely dismissals. It's just that to enter it, one must accept the reason why productivity metrics exist in the first place (even if provisionally, just for the sake of the argument).
Basic dicts, arrays and templates might be the killer feature set for declarative data languages. If everyone coalesces to those eventually, it means there's something to it.
I'm getting close to my goal of fitting an entire bootstrappable-from-source system source code as context and just telling Claude "go ahead, make it better".
Drawing is a small module though, what tuish does best is terminal compositing. It avoids tricks like cursor parking, which makes it fundamentally different from other TUIs internally. That's why we can render an editor in a partial viewport (non-full screen).
Also, no dependencies to install or compilation steps, just clone and run.
In the examples, there is a full text editor interface written in nothing but shell and other cool tricks (correct-width terminal tables, box drawing).
Would love some feedback. I tested only on a few selected terminals (WezTerm, VSCode terminal, Windows Terminal), but it should work on a bunch more.
But that's the most important part. A repository without CI is basically dead.
The biggest challenge of this era is automated verification, and proper CI infrastructure is essential.
GitHub feels like what Hudson/Jenkins was some decades ago. Horrible, but the only one that did what it did.
I run probably hundreds of dollars of CI on GitHub per month. Except I don't pay a cent for it (all open source public repos). I can't just let that go, those workers do real work.
reply