To add some more context:
Eglot is part of Emacs now, so it comes preinstalled. It's good at finding lsp servers, but won't help you to install them. Definitely the option if you want to keep things simple and can live with the need to manually install servers.
(Also a quick note, the hook you should use to auto activate eglot is eglot-ensure, rather than just eglot.
I can't imagine that's any more free than bitwarden?
The big downside is that, for backwards compatibility, the default must still be unsafe code. Ideally this could be toggled with a compiler flag, rather than having to wrap most code in "safe" blocks (like rust, but backwards).
One potential upside that people don't seem to be discussing is that the safe subset could also be the place to finally start cutting down the bloat of C++. We could encourage most developers to write exclusively in the safe subset, and aim to make that the "much smaller and cleaner language" trying to get out of C++.
This is for trains... My guess is that it's for 20-30 year olds that commute by rail
Obviously there's a lot of caveats about how representative this survey (or any other survey) is of the broader population, but I think this is a good reminder of how weird we all are. Nobody on here claims to use Ubuntu or Manjaro, yet they are more popular than Fedora (and potentially even arch, when steam decks are discounted).
There's nothing wrong with that, I love the weirdness of the Lemmy Linux community! I just always think it's good to appreciate when opinions (like my love of ublue) aren't as popular as you think they are.
I thought the route still hadn't been finalised for the northern leg of HS2. Also high speed means you're less flexible, as you need to go in a straighter line than normal rail.
I agree that it seems unlikely that the extra effort to complete the northern leg of HS2 would be greater than that of starting from scratch, but I've been surprised before.
Please somebody correct me if I'm wrong, but I really don't find the "chip makers don't have to pay licence fees" a compelling argument that RISC-V is good for the consumer. Theres only a few foundries capable of making CPUs, and the desktop market seems incredibly hard to break into.
I imagine it's likely that the cost of ISA licencing isn't what's holding back competition in the CPU space, but rather its a good old fashioned duopoly combined with a generally high cost of entry.
Of course, more options is better IMO, and the Linux community's focus on FOSS should make hopping architectures much easier than on Windows or MacOS. But I'd be surprised if we see a laptop/desktop CPU based on RISC-V competing with current options anytime soon.
Am I right in thinking that the article's main complaint, namely that the means testing excludes those too poor to retire, is wrong? You can still claim pension credit if you're on a low income.
We have bad/corrupt governments sometimes, that doesn't mean we should get rid of governments. (Though maybe the libertarian Fraser institute might disagree with me there.)
Firstly, I reckon it’s debatable whether having an active monarchy is a net gain financially (how much could we charge for admission to Buckingham Palace?).
But, for me at least, it's simply a matter of principle. I believe we are all born equal, and that nobody should be given special treatment due to something as trivial as their ancestry. Having a monarchy flies directly in the face of many values I think we as a nation value deeply.
Also they have a lot of land that their great great ... Grandad nicked from the Saxons and I wouldn't mind that being nationalised.
I feel this. I remember spending ages trying to figure out how to remove the bar in doom modeline (yes eventually I realised I could just make it the same colour as the background...), only to discover that it was necessary to control the size of the modeline.
I imagine this stuff is really deep in the internals of Emacs, which is why people are less keen to touch it. But if we were in the mood to do that, I would like even more CSS-like features, such as the ability to configure each side of a box property independently
Unless, you know, they enjoy doing that