tokei VS delta

So If we would only count code and not comments, it is only 9489 LoC Rust. Which would be about 0.03% and if we take all lines and not only LoC it would be around 0.05%

[0] https://github.com/XAMPPRocky/tokei

[1] https://github.com/torvalds/linux/commit/b401b621758e46812da...

thirdly: found this (https://github.com/XAMPPRocky/tokei) and wanted to analyze languages used on my system, didn't see a package manager (apt) for it that I had. So i installed cargo via apt-get rustup. Added the bin folder to $PATH via PATH=$PATH:~/.cargo/bin. But did not make it permanent. And stupidly rand tokei on "/", realizing how long and unhelpful that would be killed it. Then ran it in a dump folder with some very nested repo dumps, and tons of wolfram.nb files. After killing that too, and attempting to kill via system monitor. Still have two of those as zombie processes.

tokei

For what it's worth, tokei seems to be named after tokei.

BTW, for more info on how it is done, you can check out tokei which is the library use by onefetch for code statistics.

With pytokei you can count code quickly using all the power from tokei, but from python.

Tokei is a nice utility to count lines and stats of code. It is very fast, accurate, and has a nice output. It supports over 150 languages and can output in JSON, YAML, CBOR, and human-readable tables.

Thanks for the difftastic & zoxide tips.

However, I've been using this git pager/difftool: https://github.com/dandavison/delta

While it's not structural like difft, it does produce more readable output for me (at least when scrolling fast through git log -p /scanning quickly

View on GitHub

I'm currently waiting on the integration between Delta and Difftastic:

https://github.com/dandavison/delta/issues/535

Difftastic now has JSON output, whic should make it much easier to build this.

I'm surely in the minority here. I've been using Emacs for almost a decade now, but I just can't get into the Magit workflow. I've tried several times, but always end up going back to Git on the command line. I have dozens of aliases, shell integrations, a nice diff viewer[1], etc., and interacting with Git has become muscle memory. I can commit, cherry-pick, rebase, bisect, fix conflicts, etc., in a fraction of the time it would take me to navigate Magit's UI. I'm sure with enough practice, a Magit user could do this more quickly and efficiently, but honestly, with some custom-built porcelain, Git's UI is not so bad. Though this could very well be Stockholm syndrome after using it for such a long time...

For whatever reason, Magit's opinionated workflows never clicked with me. A part of it is the concern that it will do something weird to my repo that I'll then have to waste more time undoing manually. I usually don't trust sugary wrappers around tools. And another is the fact I don't use Emacs on all machines, and setting up Git on a remote system is just a matter of copying over my config and some shell integrations.

Also, on a more personal note, I find the cultish fanboyism whenever Magit is brought up slightly offputting. Does anyone have anything bad to say about it? No software can realistically be this infallible. :)

[1]: https://github.com/dandavison/delta

For looking at diffs I still prefer the command line though, and use delta to view diffs between commits or branches.