There is no difference, from the model's point of view, between code it wrote and code someone else wrote. It's all just context.

Analogies can provide insight without exact equivalence.

While true, that doesn't distinguish between Zig and Rust, as both allow you to manually allocate memory and create custom data structures.

Ok, but doing manual memory management in Rust is a bit like digging a ditch with a spoon. I get that its technically possible, that does not mean it should be done outside the most exceptional of circumstances.

Jon Gjengset has some live streams where he does agentic coding.

Yes, but in my experience Claude is much better at diagnosing issues on Linux than any other OS because it's text-native and is the best documented OS.

Where I live (major city) because of zoning there are few apartment buildings and basically 100% are only for rent, not individually owned units. So if you want to own where you live it must be a townhome or detached house.

In fact, being able to "play the game" so to speak is probably part of what the interviewer is looking for.

It is also possible that they were trying to see, if the person had traumas that would interfere with their ability to work with toxic content, do red-teaming / etc tasks.

I've always been interested in Fossil, especially how they handle all the things in a project that aren't strictly code but still need to be tracked.

I'm like the person you responded to, I've just used fossil personally for years after working at a place using it a while back and always liked it.

This is its moment though. It is so well suited for LLM coding tools. You can jam all the markdown context, skills etc into the wiki. The CLI has wiki and ticket tools so those are just available for it to use. Fossil does not mind if you use the repo DB for your own stuff, so you can log all your sessions in there, fts5 is plenty for as needed on demand retrieval.

Big changes to professional development over the last year and hard to predict how it will all shake out, but I think the tooling will converge on something that fossil already has all the structure for. I was a late adopter on LLM-assisted coding but already feel ahead of a lot of my peers because of how easy and effective this approach is.

If you're talking about binary files, then it has similar limitations to Git and Mercurial, AFAIK. Fossil, git, and Mercurial are not really designed for large binary files.

Otherwise, in Fossil, any text is just another artifact. Wiki pages can be stored as files in the repo ("embedded") and versioned in the same manner as code files (that is, exposed through the same interface), or tracked behind the scenes (in a separate database, IIUC, with a different interface). Tickets and forum entries are also tracked and versioned similarly to non-embedded docs.

Aside from everything being versioned, the visibility of the objects is quite good. The user interface, both command and web, is light-years better than anything Git related.

I highly recommend you check it out. Even if you find it doesn't meet your needs, many of the design decisions are instructive. I find it quite inspiring.

It's pretty clear to me that these systems have a massive potential for intelligence agencies as people move more and more of their internal thought process to an external tool.

And, of course, intelligence agencies are good at realizing potential.

I think Arch is a great general purpose distribution because it doesn't try to hide anything from the user - all the details are right out in the open. That and excellent community documentation.