tacoda

Noted. This one is actually in response to feedback I received here.

That’s fair. I usually have a separate alias file in my config. But it’s really a convenience for me.

I agree with this. If it’s text, I do it in the terminal, but I still use GUI for Chrome or Zoom. I think the discoverability depends on the product. On the other hand, in the terminal, it’s a help flag or a man page.

Both actually. It is incorrect. It’s two words, but I also have an alias that makes it two letters. Thanks for pointing this out.

Technically when you write in the domain, you are effectively making your own Lisp and then using it. It’s one of the amazing things that macros can do.

I would call these different dialects of Lisp. The data doesn’t have to be a function. It’s illustrative. The patterns of application still work. What’s the difference if delimiters are different or if you are calling JVM libraries? The high-level ideas are still right there. Consider JavaScript. It is definitely not a Lisp, but if you model it as Lisp in C’s clothes, then all of a sudden IIFEs make total sense. The point is that it’s a helpful mental model for languages other than Lisp.

An untested codebase doesn't just lack tests. It actively teaches every contributor, human or agent, that tests aren't part of the work.

Coding agents pattern-match on what they find. If the convention is no tests, that's what they'll write. And the longer it goes on, the more the codebase is shaped in ways that make testing harder, which entrenches the pattern further. New post on why testing is no longer optional in the new world of agentic coding, how to start when you have zero tests, and what to do when the code resists being tested at all.