Built one for myself. It's context-aware and promptable.
Tested well on Linux, not so much on other platforms but in theory should support them.
It's a bit meta but I wrote it mostly using Claude Code. Once I had an MVP, I was able to prompt much faster by just speaking out what I wanted it to change.
The hardest part for me in using nvim for java is the debugger tooling. I primarily use IntelliJ for any JVM related languages, and the debugger has always been invaluable. The debugging has always felt more polished and easy to configure in JetBrains IDEs. The nvim-dap and nvim-dap-ui had a bit too much friction to configure for it to my liking, and inevitably I reverted to IntelliJ. However, I love the keyboard-driven flow I can achieve in nvim where JetBrains IDEs fall short.
What kills me with JetBrains is they work on a barely functional (according to vim coders I talk to) simulation plugin, instead of just investing resources into integrating Neovim as a backend via plugin. You can literally have all the niceness of JetBrains IDEs with the editing power of Neovim. That alone would flip so many die hard Vim users.
I had a few people who wanted the better IDE, but they hated the keybinding hell they were going through. Having a true integration would have flipped them fully.
The problem there is that you'd be integrating two massive codebases, each with different expectations, assumptions etc. No matter how hard you try, they'd clash in places and some things would not work, leaving one side or another unhappy even with this massive effort. IdeaVim makes it work by having a massively simplified vim-like editor, specifically written for IntelliJ.
I use my iPad and a few of the apps. It is quite fun actually, you can stop, restart parts you don't like, put it into loops, speed up sections or slow them down.
I don’t see this as hiding code complexity or an alternative to writing cleaner code. It seems the argument is that when we come to a file/class/etc., that we should be initially presented with the outline rather than both the outline and details. It’s an approach to orienting oneself to a grouping of functionality, made first class by the IDE. It’s almost like opening a book and starting with the table of contents before diving into any specific chapter’s details. Allowing the reader to get a sense of what’s covered by this grouping of functionality before diving into the details. I haven’t tried this approach myself but it seems like an interesting exercise at the least.
# projects I work on
code/
dotfiles/
# main obsidian.md repo that everything I learn dumps into
omega/
# public repos for local code spelunking, these remain untouched
repos/
It's just organically evolved, borrowing from this and that.
Sad to hear this. I had read his book “Elbow Room” back when I had been diving more deeply into free will and the various viewpoints associated. I don’t know that I found it convincing but it was an interesting peek into the compatibilist argument.
On any query, you get a summary answer from the latest LLMs (Claude 3, ChatGPT 4 Turbo, Mistral Large) and the list of sources. Very thorough, highly efficient, and no ads.
Honestly I’ve tried perplexity and it was great at first but I find the results exhausting. Imagine reading all that and realizing it’s not what you’re looking for. Also, at the end of the day you have to trust that it can find stuff better than you.
I prefer finding my own sources and querying from there.
“The Unbearable Lightness of Being” is just fantastic. I think it’s well worth your time. I’ve read it a few times now. With each subsequent read at a different point in my life, it’s been interesting to see new insights and perspectives emerge. If you end liking it, another one from Kundera I particularly enjoyed was “The Book of Laughter and Forgetting”.
Exactly my experience. This is the killer feature for me. It helps to not break flow while working on a given task. Also, it’s great that the floating pane is per tab as well so those related background/interactive tasks can be context dependent.
