The only Git GUIs that I've ever liked:
I've tried almost all the others (SmartGit, Sublime Merge, GitKraken, etc.), and didn't really like how they worked.
Ooo I've not seen this before. Looks interesting.
Oo hello. Didn't know that's what you were doing these days! Hope it goes well, though I'd be nervous about a realistic business plan.
Anyway, yeah bit too late for Python.
The only good free option for that is SolveSpace. Don't bother with FreeCAD. It still isn't usable. SolveSpace is remarkably good for an open source CAD program.
It does have some notable missing features though, e.g. no bevels, fillets, drafts, etc. and last time I used it it had accuracy issues with small holes. But for your use case it's probably fine.
Isn't it actually because they moved most of their driver code onto the card itself or something?
It is very powerful, but it is painfully obvious that no one has ever gone back and said, “but what if anyone else who wants to use this is not a Linux cli guru and already has an expert understanding of git commands?”.
This x100. I mean I think I know the answer - Git was written by a C kernel guy, and the devs that it attracted are C guys. The kind of people who think user friendliness is a weakness. Guess how you contribute a patch to Git? Well step 1 is reading a 10 page essay... Needless to say that isn't going to attract many people that care about beginners.
Tbf I've been using Git for at least 10 years and I only just discovered this. I think nobody talks about it because it doesn't show history which is 90% of the reason to use a Git GUI.
You're still limited by lambda expressions though. And in general the language is still statement based, not expression based. You can't do a = if foo then x else y type things (except for the one-off and backwards x if foo else y; they were so close!).
Do you ever use git log --graph ...?
The experience was awful.
I did not use it.
Hmm. You sure have a strong hatred of a thing you never used, about which your main objection (no HTML explorer) is completely untrue.
I don't think anyone would say you need GraphQL for a tiny 10-20 endpoint project. It's for big projects.
Thanks, I'll watch some.
You're still missing the point. We all understand that definition. We're just saying that it is incorrect use of the word "concurrent". Does that make sense? The word "concurrent" means things happening at the same time. It's stupid for programmers to redefine it to mean things not happening at the same time.