dgtized

This functionality is provided by `xref-find-definition`[1]. For many languages this defaults to using keywords from a generated tags index file, but many modes have a language server or some other more specific facility to provide this functionality at runtime. I'm not familiar with what provides that functionality for C/C++, but Ruby has `robe`, python has `jedi`, clojure has `cider`, rust has `racer`, etc. It generally requires a some setup for each language you use, but there is broad support for this functionality (and it often provides some form of symbol auto-completion as well).

Some modes also support limited refactoring tools[2], but that's not quite as common.

[1] https://www.gnu.org/software/emacs/manual/html_node/emacs/Xr...

[2] https://github.com/clojure-emacs/clj-refactor.el, https://github.com/Wilfred/emacs-refactor, https://www.emacswiki.org/emacs/SemanticRefactor

  (setq inhibit-startup-screen t)

C-h b shows all the key bindings, and C-h f will describe any command (and give access to the source where it was defined).

How is this any different than functionality that requires a specific executable to be called from Emacs. Some of those executables are platform specific. Last I checked using ispell on windows meant playing games with cygwin or some other fix.

The purpose of this is not to limit functionality to a specific platform, it's to expand the capabilities of Emacs. My understanding is FFI is intended to work on all platforms that Emacs support, so it just means the library authors need to provide platform specific support, just the same as they do with packages that depend on specific binaries in the path.

Throwing out a new feature that provides obvious benefits because of imagined future packages that may choose against being platform agnostic seems rather short sighted.

Allowing new packages to support platform specific FFI is not going to decrease the portability of the existing ecosystem. In addition, I don't think there is anything precluding FFI calls from working on multiple platforms so long as those libraries are available.

How is this different then freenet?

How about this approach? http://blog.habnab.it/blog/2013/06/25/emacsclient-and-tramp/

He's using tramp to copy an auth key to the remote system, but then using that to allow the remote emacsclient to talk back to the host. Has some caveats, but it's essentially the single daemon, many remote clients approach?

Are you sure you can't? Pretty sure I have used a remotely started emacs --daemon and used emacsclient -c with DISPLAY set correctly and X forwarding to bring a GUI frame locally, and then use emacsclient on that machine to pop open files from the remote command line to the existing, local gui frame. If you lose your connection the gui client might kill your daemon (at least with gtk) though.

Or do your editing from ansi-term or eshell from within the long startup gui you have running on the remote system. Eshell find-file will pop to that buffer from the commandline.

It is unfortunate that tramp often feels too slow for these tasks, as that would seem like another logical approach. Maybe it's faster without ido and friends doing lots of completion requests?

So launch it in tmux, and reconnect the next time you jump to that server. If you want faster start time you can also start emacs, run start-server, and then use emacsclient everywhere else to quickly open files from the commandline. In general though, opening and closing emacs all time is the wrong workflow to use with emacs.

I went to school with ekarulf above, can confirm he had the skillset and held that position. I can also think of a couple other folks with skillsets that covered the full gamut. Discussion about pay aside, it's not a mythical skillset. I don't know about the "Rockstar" nomenclature, but the right generalist can do a lot.

I'm curious why they mention uploaded SSH keys. I presume they mean cases where SSH keypairs have been uploaded? The public key is public, and in fact anyone can use the github API to pull the verified public keys for any user in the system, http://developer.github.com/v3/users/keys/. If there is code uploaded with private keys in it, then it's likely there are other security problems in the organization.

I like to think of them like telegrams #stop They seem somewhat anachronistic #stop

Didn't get aorund reading it till this year, but I highly recommend _The Windup Girl_ by Paolo Bacigalupi. _Pump 6 and Other Stories_ by him is also quite good. Finally got around to reading the Takahashi Kovec's novels, _Altered Carbon_ by Richard K Morgan and it's sequels.

I'm having a little trouble following your examples. In particular some of the examples are wrapped in (streams) which I am interpreting as the data source to query, but then many of the examples are just a bare (where) with clause. Or is that the final target ie you wrap it in streams if you want to make a new stream? The system looks pretty slick, but I am having some problems with understanding some of the core concepts in the query DSL.

Pending subway/bus/train departures when near a station.

Well it for worked for Yodlee. They provided scraping services for Mint until Intuit took over.

It's still missing a method to hide an entry that you no longer feel like having on your feed without explicitly removing that user from the feed.

The article makes too black and white a distinction between tinkering and creativity. The author is also very focused on the concept of an idea being fundamentally new in order for it be a creative action. I'm not certain that you can so easily distinguish between a new idea and a variation on an old idea.

As example, was the development of a cell phone a new idea? I believe the idea of combining a radio, a simple computer, and a battery into a portable device intended to connect to the existing telephone network is not particularly creative, but an extraordinarily useful variation on existing ideas. A variation that has had sufficient impact that we tend to think of it as a new idea. If one goes back to the development of each of the pieces, I believe one can paint a similar picture for each of the priors. Even if one goes back as far as basic technology like fire, spears, agriculture or the wheel I think similar stories could be told.

The point of this is not that there are no new ideas under the sun, but that tinkering is the process of experimenting, and I don't particularly believe that it is possible to create a new idea (under whatever definition of new) without experimenting or tinkering with the priors.