Thanks for trying it! This sounds like a bug. Mantic.sh supports all languages (Python, Rust, Go, Java, etc.) it's language-agnostic since it ranks files by path/filename, not content.
A few debugging questions:
- What query did you run? (e.g., mantic "auth logic")
- What's your project structure? (Is it a monorepo, or does it have a non-standard layout?)
- Can you share the output of mantic "your query" --json?
If it's only returning
package.json, it likely means:
- The query is too generic (e.g., mantic "project"), OR
- The file scanner isn't finding your source files (possible .gitignore issue)
Tip: Try running git ls-files | wc -l in your project, if that returns 0 or a very small number, Mantic won't have files to search.
Happy to debug further if you can share more details!
What a fantastic and timely post! Especially coming from i3 maintainer! Michael did such diligent analasys and saved me (and hopefully others) a lot of time. I was considering trying Wayland/sway and this post answered all my questions and showed me that it is not ready, at least for me, yet.
I suspect the price of a ship compared to economic damages caused by the cut cable is negligible. This is what russia calls "assymetric war". The response should be more economic sanctions.
Economic sanctions won't prevent the FSB from paying off ship captains to do these things. Seizing ships and imprisoning captains might provide some amount of deterrent. Clearly only way economic sanctions will have a behavioral impact on Russia is if the effects are so bad it triggers revolution which has its own dangers. Direct consequences for the people in the sphere of these actions is more prudent.
No, he's saying that the area is international waters because Finland and Estonia agreed it was not either's territorial waters. It doesn't have to be international waters.
The US just doesn’t recognize China’s claims to areas (eg, Taiwan or ASEAN sea islands), so doesn’t regard those as Chinese territorial waters in the first place.
The point of US freedom of navigation exercises is to assert free transit of allied and international waters, despite Chinese claims, rather than to transit Chinese territorial waters. US warships generally avoid areas which the US views as Chinese territorial waters.
The fight in and around China's sea claims is they encroach into what the rest of the world generally agrees are other countries waters not international waters. The US would still insist it could travel through the Taiwanese or Phillipine waters China wants to claim as their own. It doesn't seem to map at all on to the situation between Finland and Estonia.
Sounds like something I could use, but installing a binary via `curl` doesn't sit right with me. Next problem you have is "explain how this thing was installed on my system" followed "is it up to date (including security patches).
I understand that installing via `curl` isn’t for everyone, but since this is the first release, I intentionally kept it simple. Now that the tool is gaining some traction, I can definitely plan proper packages for future releases. Thanks for your inputs.
Just to update, witr is currently available on brew and AUR.
deb, rpm and apk packages are also available in the release, and can be run directly via nix without installation.
Multiple screens support is listed as non-goal. Would that prevent its usage with window managers which support virtiaul desktops? I am i3 user and it is a critical feature for me.
Is this why back in the day sometimes a Linux distro would have a multi-monitor setup where each monitor was an actual different desktop cube for example. There was a time when each window for an Nvidia graphics card in that type of configuration could not be moved from one screen to another, etc.
Given that they're fine with adding breaking changes to the protocol, I think it's a shame that they're not supporting multi-screen. This will lead to the same problem with Xrandr based multi-monitor where you get screen tearing with mixed refresh rate displays. I would prefer to see "traditional X11 multihead but you can move programs between screens" as the solution for multiple monitors. Even if it worked like Mac OS X where you can't have a single window span across multiple monitors, it would still be better than the current state of X11.
As others have already mentioned, the continuous multi-monitor(Xinerama) was an afterthought. A good news is that, by design, it’s actually pretty easy to add in the later steps.
There are many arguable points in this blog post, but I want to highlight just one: the need for formal specification. It is indeed a big issue. However, one must distinguish between a full specification, which is sufficient to prove functional correctness, and a specification of certain security or safety properties, which only allows us to verify those properties. For example, we can easily specify the property that "the program shall never read uninitialised memory" and prove it. That wouldn't guarantee that the program is functionally correct, but it would at least rule out a whole class of potential errors.
reply