It's a system where a 3rd party library (aptly named Coq) gets to throughly verify your kernel, and you get to watch it do its thing? I think the name is fitting.
Yeah, "coq" is a grade school joke in French class. It just means "rooster" or something in French, but it sounds ridiculous in English. This one has the same problem.
A company with that in the name made the French national team jersey for a while.
Coq is also named after the creator Coquand. It’s a shame that his work is being minimized because the English-speaking majority is sensitive and can’t hear a homonym for the slang for a male body part.
I wish we sometimes lived in a world where people wouldn’t be afraid at work to discuss why they like or dislike Coq or whether it meets their needs or if it’s too much for them. A man can dream though, a man can dream.
To be entirely fair cock (which surprisingly isn't actually derived from french but from english's germanic roots) also means rooster in english as well.
As someone who is getting into character art again after a very long time, this tool looks amazing. I've bookmarked it, and after I use it for a few references, I'll likely end up getting pro.
He said in the comments on the post that he valued the parts, units, and his time at about 100 bucks, and put them up for 150, which no one would pay. This was back in 2022ish.
As others have pointed out, this should have been a showHN, but the article is vague enough that it wouldn't have garnered attention as a showHN. Furthermore, the post inflates the problems of design handoff to try and sell a no code editor environment. Yes, I'm aware that the platform enables coding capabilities, but plenty of no code tools can.
If you want to get into the shortcomings of Figma when it comes to hand off, I'm more than happy to have that conversation. Units that aren't valid in the CSS spec? Sure. Vector tools leading to things that are only achievable through clip path and masking? You bet. But claiming that designers and developers should have the same job when they're completely different skill sets and claiming that both roles are using the wrong tools to get the job done is no way to sell your product.
> Games worth their salt are not created by bolting together a collection of numerical statistics. That is how you get cookie clicker.
I agree wholeheartedly with the sentiment of the article, but cookie clicker IS a game worth its salt. Input mechanic difficulty is not the sole factor to consider when determining the quality of a game loop.
I really enjoy Arc's approach to the browser interface, but I am kind of shocked that it requires firebase at all. It touts privacy, but we have to log in, and our data is being stored in a BAAS owned by Google. It would have been SO much simpler to make it so that data is owned by the user and stored on disk. At MOST, maybe a paid syncing feature would require an external database. A takeover path like this is a big deal, but as the author pointed out, you stored URL browsing data for boosts. "Privacy first" browser's are marketing jargon today, and that sucks.
> "Privacy first" browser's are marketing jargon today
A glance at Arc's privacy policy makes it clear they aren't privacy anything [1]. (Contrast their device and product usage data sections with Kagi's [2].)
I'm most interested in the AI interior design. Is it using products that are available? Can we set budgets for the designs? Seems like a product in and of itself in that one feature.
This feature is marked as "Coming soon" and not ready yet, but the idea is to feed a room screenshot to AI and to generate a realistic design based on this and on a text prompt.
I’m losing my love for the web because it’s boring, not because of how it’s built. I am also guilty of this and contribute to the problem at my day job, but taking a limitless method of creation and churning out business apps and marketing sites until they inundate everything we do is a shame.
May get into a different kind of programming, web dev just feels uninspired to me right now. Note: this is my world on the web right now, I’m sure others disagree and have another opinion. Loving something is subjective.
Funny, I think the stringly-typed-ness is great. Turns out that’s actually a common aspect of a lot of software I really admire, like Unix pipes and spreadsheets.
I don't mind it when the data being pushed through is less-structured. Once it gets past a certain point, I just want types backing everything up and double-checking my work as I go.
