> Meanwhile I'm watching a community of mostly young people building and using tools like copilot, cursor, replit, jacob etc and wiring up LLMs into increasingly more complex workflows.
And yet, I don't see much evidence that software quality is improving, if anything it seems in rapid decline.
To add some balance to everyone slating Jinja in the comments, I've personally found it great to use.
Sure you CAN write unmaintainable business logic spaghetti in your templates, doesn't mean you SHOULD (Most criticism appears to come from this angle).
The defaults it ships out of the box makes the shell actually usable. Unsure I could ever go back to a regular bash/zsh prompt.
A lot of people will tell you this is slow and you've got to use X,Y,Z instead. If you're new, I'd strongly recommend just sticking with this, it's much easier to configure.
I see a lot of negativity in this thread. Personally I think flatpaks make it super easy to use a rock solid stable distribution as your base OS, and then run the latest and greatest software on top.
In years gone-by if I wanted the latest versions of software I'd have to use an unstable rolling release distro. Now I can just use Debian stable and essentially get the exact same experience.
It's a valid reason to have stuff run in CI (i.e. consistent environment). But for my line of work I can't think of a single scenario where the architecture / platform has ever caused issues in tests, typically it's caught at build time / when resolving dependencies/packages.
I guess it's the same kinda friction with vanilla vim/neovim vs vim 'distributions' that provide a bunch of stuff out of the box.