@pxeger Oh yes, it'd be totally organic, I just wouldn't disclose my affiliation with Vyxal :P
@pxeger I don't think there'd be much risk of us accidentally DDoSing it, right? That'd only happen if the post got very popular, which is not too likely
But you're assuming it becomes super hot on HN and everyone actually tries to go there to try out Vyxal, which is probably not going to happen (unfortunately? fortunately?)
I think we could be managing our branches a bit better. It's best to keep branches either: very short-lived (only one feature (e.g. a single digraph or adding a single workflow)), or very long-lived, like master or fresh-beginnings. In the case of a long-lived branch, it should only be added to by merging short-lived branches. (Or for very minor changes like typos and whatnot, it's ok to work directly on the branch)
it's a bit late to apply that to the rewrite now (given that it's almost done), but those principles can be applied to bug patches and other feature requests in the future
Why do we need separate characters to close function definitions (;), if-statements (]), while loops (}), and for loops ())? If we replace them all with ;, we can free up 3 more one-byters!
If we do use ; to close everything, I don't think we should use symmetric characters like [, {, and ( to open (because it'd be confusing later when you use ] as a command instead of using it to close [)
@pxeger IMHO it's kinda silly to make a language which tries to achieve both, because they're both such polar opposites, so I think Vyxal should aim to be the golfiest (first), but without completely disregarding readability
but that would mean we can sacrifice readability (sometimes)
cgccuserapproved on PR #272 (Vyxal/Vyxal): "There are things to be fixed, but I think we can merge now and fix those in a separate (short-lived) branch."
@user I think they're there as replies as well, but GitHub doesn't load all of my comments initially because there are so many of them, so it thinks yours are orphaned. If you go to Files Changed and open the actual diffs, you can see the proper conversations
Update:
There is a newer filter described in Samy's answer that provides a more succinct way of achieving this.
The documentation has been updated with more information now:
When you specify a branches or tags filter, the workflow only runs if at least one pattern matches. Any changes to branch...
That's for later reference for me to know how to make workflows for all branches