spacehammer VS moonscript

For certain concepts that I don't understand fully, I'm using chatgpt-shell. It is beyond fantastic and almost impossible to describe in a single post. This is, for example, just one of my use cases: When I'm writing a comment or a message to my colleague (and of course, yes, I edit just about any text in Emacs), I can select a paragraph and ask chatgpt-shell to improve it. It does, but it also shows me the diff of the changes, that is how I set it up.

I’ve been using hammerspoon for several years and it has really become integral to my workflow.

You may want to check out the extension package spacehammer[0]. It includes a bunch of workflows and shortcuts that I’ve found extremely useful.

Interestingly (for me at least), it’s authored in Fennel [1], a lisp that compiles to lua. I actually found spacehammer originally when I was working on converting my personal hammerspoon config to Fennel.

[0] https://github.com/agzam/spacehammer

[1] https://fennel-lang.org/

Throw in Spacehammer, and you can add a note from anywhere in the operating system.

I'm a big fan of hammerspoon, but not so much Lua. I also use emacs with Doom, where a lot of bindings are behind a 'leader key'. I found an awesome framework called 'spacehammer'[1] that fits very well into the way I like to work. It similarly hides binding behind a leader, and it's written in Fennel, a lisp that compiles to Lua. I feel like I get to expand the customizability of Emacs out to my whole system and I love it. Hammerspoon is pretty bare on its own so I suggest you check out spacehammer even if it's just a show case of the potential of hammerspoon.

[1] https://github.com/agzam/spacehammer

Now I like lua, and think single pass is the way to go for interpreted, since you don't have the disadvantage of a slow compile time no matter how big your codebase gets, BUT its not great to write in. things like +=, ++, are not possible, which means the only solution is to transpile into it, which has led to some good languages like moonscript[0], teal[1] which offers static type checking, an absolute must as your codebase grows.

[0]: https://moonscript.org/

That can be very productive and clever, but be - and stay - aware that such polyglot solutions tend to be maintenance headaches in the longer run.

There is a really nice open source project out there that allows you to train your hearing and your sightreading, but it's written in the authors own language which in turn compiles to JavaScript and the headache to set up their toolchain is such that I haven't bothered fixing any of the bugs that I'm aware of (and there are plenty).

https://sightreading.training/

https://github.com/leafo/sightreading.training

It's written in a language called 'Moonscript':

https://github.com/leafo/moonscript

Which compiles to Lua. Which compiles to JS.

Madness. Nice madness, but still, it stopped me from being a contributor.

RE: the cost of switching at this point, what about languages that compile to Lua? Like https://moonscript.org/. That would let you keep the legacy code, no?

In the case of Lapis, it is actually written in Moonscript, which needs a few more things.

There's also some languages made to compile straight to Lua: - MoonScript is the most popular Lua wrapper - it's built to be more Python-like, featuring indentation-based scopes, function calls without parentheses, lambda syntax, list comprehension, and much more. - Yuescript is a modern update to MoonScript that adds more features (I haven't used it myself, so I'm not entirely sure exactly how it differs from MS). - Teal is a version of Lua that adds static typing for better code standards.

A programmer-friendly language that compiles to Lua.

This is a sample code for learning, written in Moonscript for TIC-80: