[dead]
you should report that bug to ccrypt, emacs is getting a lot more strict about lexical binding support (for good reason). it just needs ;; -- lexical-binding: t/nil -- at the top of the file.
do people actually claim LLMs are good with Lisp? all i've seen recently are people frustrated that their model can't seem to balance parentheses.
no offense but it doesn't sound like you understand what worker owned means. you straight up just described capital owned.
When that single issue is a genocide, the calculus changes. Would you feel the same about a news source that argues the Hutus were acting in self defense?
[dead]
you should report that bug to ccrypt, emacs is getting a lot more strict about lexical binding support (for good reason). it just needs ;; -- lexical-binding: t/nil -- at the top of the file.
do people actually claim LLMs are good with Lisp? all i've seen recently are people frustrated that their model can't seem to balance parentheses.
no offense but it doesn't sound like you understand what worker owned means. you straight up just described capital owned.
When that single issue is a genocide, the calculus changes. Would you feel the same about a news source that argues the Hutus were acting in self defense?