Have you found them to work well and be consistent? I've been a helix user for a couple years now, and I found Zed's helix keybindings to be inaccurate. Either that or I have some config options set that were confounding them. Curious how your experience with them has been?
I remember reading a similar thing about FoundationDB with their DST a while back. Over time, they surfaced relatively few bugs in the core server, but found a bunch in the client libraries because the clients were more complicated and were not run under their DST.
Anyways, really interesting report and project. I also like your youtube show - keep up the great work! :)
I had pretty much the exact same experience with my debugger (uscope). Your debugger looks awesome, nice work! Hopefully I'll have time to get back to mine at some point (or hopefully RAD comes to Linux first haha)
I grew up in the town next door to Norwell and I play the drums. I drove by many times and would have loved to have gone in and seen if they might have given a high school student a quick tour of the less-secret parts of the factory, but I never did.
There was definitely a strong drumming community in the area; there were some fantastic players and teachers around (i.e. Steve Smith from Journey was born in Whitman). Not sure if that's because of Zildjian, but it was a fun place to grow up and play music. It might just be that there are so many strong music universities in the area.
I've been using just at work and in personal projects for almost a year, and I like it a lot. In particular, its self documentation with `just --list` makes onboarding new folks easy. It's also just a nicer syntax than make.
Agreed. As much as I want it to be simpler to build C++ programs from source, it's pretty much always _possible_ in my experience, it can just a PITA frequently.
I think that tests are a sure-fire way to improve the quality of your code, but I'd throw another piece in to the ring: sanitizers [0]. Projects that have good tests and run them regularly with TSan/ASan/UBSan in my experience are much better to work on because it means that it's much less likely there's deep seeded issues that are lurking. It gives you increased confidence that you're not introducing hard-to-detect issues as you go.
These tools aren't just exclusive to C++. I've said the same thing about C, Go, Zig, Odin, etc. Projects that use them (and have good automated tests) tend to be in good shape, and projects that don't tend to take a long time to make any progress on.