For me it became incredibly hard to find a game to get hooked on. Most recently Path of Exile was it, one of the very few games (flight sims, Gwent and Slay the Spire) that I have more than 100 hours of game play. And indeed, when I find such a game, looking forward to it was a great motivation throughout the day. Currently my only hope is with PoE2, crossing fingers for it.

Thank you, and I'd also like to point out that adding a little description to the title would not hurt. Otherwise I look at the title and feel compelled to joke "well, I mean, it's biscuit. It's in the name, it's biscuit." (Do you want to Accept Cookies? - Julie Nolke).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZARmgNzP5L0

Jokes aside, it looks really cool.

These are all great features, really. Everything I ask from a modern editor with language server support is just there. I also love modal text editors and use vi daily, EVERYWHERE (e.g. `set -o vi` on shell). But not on terminal GUI to write code, unless I am live debugging some shell script or python code on a server. I install vi extensions/plugins on all my editors. Using vscode over a terminal application has a lot advantages mostly due to being a very flexible graphical editor. You can move windows around, put them side by side, have fancy themes/colors/fonts. You can both use the keyboard AND the mouse when it is more convenient.

I still appreciate the effort, looking forward to more modal editors that are better suited to modern programming specific editing capabilities that are easy to learn and apply!

> You can move windows around, put them side by side

Why wouldn't you be able to do that with a CLI editor?

You can, but I'm not convinced that is as efficient. As someone who uses keyboard a lot, even for window management, I still reach for mouse whenever it is convenient. That's just one example. When you think about all the little information around (like in the status bar below), all the GUI elements like buttons. Just think about how IDE shows text at different sizes depending on the context, that alone should be a good argument against a CLI editor.

I find the syntax as the author intended it to be: clean. I agree with the ambiguity of positional parameters at first glance. Although named parameters (e.g. in Scala) somewhat solve this, they are optional. Having the parameters with their explicit name makes it quite readable.

  myList
      .append(5)
      .reverse
      .put(5) atIndex(0)
      .++(anotherList)
      .select(x | x.isEven)

Edit: The same feature makes it look a little weird when put on a single line, because we mentally parse the whitespace as separator but in this case it is not:

  $.name("Keli") age(50).isOld

It looks like a refreshing addition to function programming languages and I'd like to see where it goes from here, in terms of adoption and features.

$.name("Keli" :age 50).isOld

wold've been nicer to me but ah well.

I can understand $.(:name "Keli" :age 50) but not $.name("Keli" :age 50), why should the age bit go inside the parens? This introduces an asymmetry where the first key appears outside parents and subsequent keys appear inside (and as colon-initialed keywords?!)

I agree, having age(50) separate almost looks like a separate function call.