lime!

i did think about it and it matches my experience. i will read the rest of the thread.

Edit: i have now read the rest of the thread. nobody seems to agree and i see no sources.

well when you challenge an opinion you usually offer an alternative opinion.

ah, so you have an alternative explanation?

it’s weird that. it’s obviously possible to have a flat-shaded skeuomorph, just look at basically all of windows 95, but for some reason we connect them to this particular graphical style. files and folders are both part of the old classic “desktop metaphor”, so they basically have to be skeuomorphs. but like, the application icons are basically just mosaic tiles of the normal icons.

a proper skeuomorph would indicate what the program is for. krita and whatever map software that is are both good, if a little flat. but the libreoffice suite just being squares with a letter on them? have them be like, a spreadsheet for calc, a stack of cards for impress, and a printed page for write.

remember all the icons for windows 95 network utilities that have people in them? those are also (attempts at) skeumorphs because they’re trying to communicate what the program does.

a skeuomorph (from greek, “tool/container-shape”) is something that retains the characteristics of another thing that it is based on, even though those characteristics are no longer useful. think lamps shaped like candles, or the floppy disk save icon, or media player programs with volume knobs.

skeuomorphic UX is a good way to get users comfortable with a system by using designs they are already familiar with, and the original iphone used this to great effect.

This is a good example of skeuomorphic UI:

all to say, I’m not entirely sure these icons are skeuomorphs. they’re just glossy.

it looks sort of like a continuation of the beaker browser project. basically, a peer to peer browser that also serves content you have made to others using the browser. it’s a cute idea.

this reads like a teenager wrote it

i can chime in with some actual experience!

my current problems with KDE are

• the greeter only accepts my password on the secondary monitor
• the compositor shuts down whenever something uses the GPU even though the setting is off
• my primary desktop randomly shunts itself to the right, plopping on top of the desktop on the secondary display and leaving a big black void on half my primary until plasmashell is restarted
• my panels keep collapsing their content down to the width of a single pixel until i resize them
• Wayland just crashloops and is completely unusable (no, i don’t have an nvidia card)
• i still can’t get the acrylic transparency to work :(

and what’s fun about this is, the issues are so intermittent and random that i never know what i’m going to get on a given day!

good point, ruby is a good comparison. although, ruby is very different under the hood. it’s magically dynamic in a completely different way, and it also never really got the penetration on the system level that python did.

none of this is to take away from the fact that python packaging is bad. i know how to work it because i’ve been programming in python for 14 years, but trying to teach people makes the problem obvious. and yet.

i’ve seen something like this before, where the kernel holds the file handle open for the process so that it thinks the file is still there. i think it’s related to how the program closes the file but i don’t remember the details. restarting qbittorent will most likely fix it.

my dude, just seeing the text is too much effort.

i mean, that is the difference between interpreted and compiled.

if the container doesn’t work though, that means it is broken and should be fixed. the point of them is literally to be plug-n-play. that would be like distributing a go binary with a segfault in main.

that’s posturing if anything. if you’re an experienced developer it takes fully 10 minutes with either system. and if you’re not interested in modifying it, just use a container image.

the only case where i would agree with you is when i have to modify LD_LIBRARY_PATH to get things to run…

such a strange interpretation. i’ve been working in go for over 10 years now, and i love it. but the notion that you can “just find the same program but built in a different language” doesn’t make sense at all.

like, if you’re annoyed with pandoc being written in haskell and clogging up your system dependencies, you can’t just “find another pandoc”. there’s nothing like it. same thing with curl, or xonsh, or thingsboard.

such a weird take.

it’s not though. op has issues installing programs built in python. suggesting they rebuild those programs in go is 100% an apples to meatballs comparison, and way off topic.

this is not about offense! nobody is offended. but if you ask me for help with an apple pie and i tell you to make meatballs… it’s a confusing lack of relevance.

everyone focuses on the tooling, not many are focusing on the reason: python is extremely dynamic. like, magic dynamic you can modify a module halfway through an import, you can replace class attributes and automatically propagate to instances, you can decompile the bytecode while it’s running.

combine this with the fact that it’s installed by default and used basically everywhere and you get an environment that needs to be carefully managed for the sake of the system.

js has this packaging system down pat, but it has the advantage that it got mainstream in a sandboxed isolated environment before it started leaking out into the system. python was in there from the beginning, and every change breaks someone’s workflow.

the closest language to look at for packaging is probably lua, which has similar issues. however since lua is usually not a standalone application platform it’s not a big deal there.

it’s also not at all relevant. go is great, but this is about python.

there haven’t been card fees for end users in Sweden for many years. handling cash is a lot more expensive since you need somewhere secure to keep change, you loose time at the till handling the money, and you need to pay for someone to come pick it up. the time gained from just having the customers pay with card means businesses gladly swallow the fees.

and yes, i’m always surprised when going abroad how much more analog everything is. the nordics and Baltic’s are generally at about the same level (with Estonia way ahead), but the rest of the continent feels like it’s 10 years behind. I was once asked if I really wanted to pay with card in a corner shop in Leipzig, since the card fee was €10.

not that i’m a fan of the digitalisation, it makes marginalised groups even more marginalised. i see my elderly relatives struggling with it often.