What's the easiest way to use it with on-device voice model for voice chat?

https://github.com/Arthur-Ficial/apfel-gui uses on-device speech-to-text and text-to-speech

Thanks, tried it, but it's crashes on clicking the microphone icon. Default `make install` for some reason tries to install it to /usr, I changed that and after torturing more mature coding LLMs for 20 minutes, made it running with mic/sound.

The mic button requires clicking to transcribe and start listening again, and default voice is low-quality (I assume it can be configured).

In general I'm looking for a way to try the on-device hands-free voice mode.

Age verification doesn’t necessarily imply identification — eIDAS 2.0 and ISO 18013-5 have selective disclosure by design.

You can also create a skill for reviewing (which calls gemini/codex as a command line tool) and set instructions on how and when to use. Very flexible.

Yes, but what’s cool about loop is that it runs the interactive TUIs and establishes a direct connection between them. You can steer and answer questions in both sessions, not just from the main worker.

> generations of programmers have now been raised to believe that brutally inefficient, bloated, and slow software is just fine.

I believe people don't think about Knuth when they choose to write app in Electron. Some other forces might be at play here.

An invention is a new device, method, or way of doing something that did not exist before. Innovation is anything that significantly improves real world processes or products. I believe the literature uses term "innovation systems" regardless of type of economies.

Just wanted to say that article is so much deeper than it seems from the title, and also beautifully written. It was a great read!

I am glad to hear that, thank you!

As usual, great writeup and problem solving from Go team. One nitpick: wording "call to oldmath.Sub should be inlined" might be a bit confusing due to existing meaning of word "inlining" for functions (i.e. compiler inlining optimization). Without this article I would not be able to guess that this diagnostic message refer to something else.

I'm (re)writing a big project with the following approach:

1. Write tons of documentation first. I.e. NASA style, every singe known piece of information that is important to implementation. As it's a rewrite of legacy project, I know pretty much everything I need, so there is very little ideas validation/discovery in the loop for that stage. Documentation is structured in nested folders and multiple small .md files, because its amount already larger than Claude Code context (still fits into Gemini). Some of the core design documents are included into AGENTS.md(with symlink to GEMINI/CLAUDE mds)

For that particular project I spent around 1.5 months writing those docs. I used Claude to help with docs, especially based on the existing code base, but the docs are read and validated by humans, as a single source of truth. For every document I was also throwing Gemini and Codex onto it for analyzing for weaknesses or flaws (that worked great, btw).

2. TDD at it's extreme version. With unit tests, integration tests, e2e, visual testing in Maestro, etc. The whole implementation process is split in multiple modules and phases, but each phase starts with writing tests first. Again, as soon as test plan ready, I also throw it on Gemini and Codex to find flaws, missed edge cases, etc. After implementing tests, one more time - give it to Gemini/Codes to analyze and critique.

3. Actual coding. This part is the fastest now especially with docs and tests in place, but it's still crucial to split work into manageable phases/chunks, and validate every phase manually, and ocassionaly make some rounds of Gemini/Codex independently verifying if the code matches docs and doesn't contain flaws/extra duplication/etc.

I never let Claude to commit to git. I review changes quickly, checking if the structure of code makes sense, skimming over most important files to see if it looks good to me (i.e. no major bullshit, which, frankly, has never happened yet) and commit everything myself. Again, trying to make those phases small enough so my quick skim-review still meaningful.

If my manual inspection/test after each phase show something missing/deviating, first thing I ask is "check if that is in our documentation". And then repeat the loop - update docs, update/add tests, implement.

The project is still in progress, but so far I'm quite happy with the process and the speed. In a way, I feel that "writing documentation" and "TDD" has always been a good practice, but too expensive given that same time could've been spent on writing actual code. AI writing code flipped that dynamics, so I'm happy to spend more time on actual architecting/debating/making choices, then on finger tapping.

what exactly people call 'garbage collection' in Zig? build cache cleanup?

Indeed what was referred to here is the zig build system cache.

I tried Tcl/Tk back in 2005 and abandoned it in favour of Qt/QML (and much later Flutter), mostly because UI was so bloody ugly it was embarassing to show to any other user except myself. Has anything changed since then?

AFAIK the answer is an emphatic yes, a lot has changed since 2005. Tcl9 was recently released and has many new features. As far as Tk goes, for a number of years we've had "themed Tk" or Ttk widgets, much better styling, resembles native widgets quite closely. Ttk widgets aren't as configurable as regular ones, well, everything has tradeoffs.

You should take a look at the current releases, you might be pleasantly surprised.