Clojurians Log v2

Pretty sure all of these things have been discussed to a various degree in #clojure, so I'd suggest just searching there. Also, 1.12 still supports JDK 8. So nothing in Clojure can use anything that became available after JDK 8. But future releases are likely to drop JDK 8 support and move on to a newer LTS.

Re goals, the first is to provide reach to the host in ways that are useful and second to leverage new features inside the impl when it’s advantageous for perf etc. generally, our approach to the latter is conservative, preferring to adopt new features after the bugs have been shaken out

It is possible to support newer features even without moving the baseline, and we have done this many times, so that's not usually a constraint

Clojure 1.12 supports automatic conversion of Clojure fns as Java functional interfaces, and has methods for consuming or converting streams for interop purposes

Gatherers are just new jdk api. so are reachable and usable in tandem with streams without any new work. Gatherers are effectively transducers though and I've done a little research thinking about whether we could convert transducers into gatherers, which would be interesting, inconclusive yet on whether that's worth doing

ScopedValues are definitely of interest, reachable now api, but more interesting as a possible substrate for dynamic vars but that will probably have to wait. Haven't looked at the vector api much, but reachable now via interop of course

> preferring to adopt new features after the bugs have been shaken out Given how shaky some of the recent JDK feature additions have been, this is a really good approach to continue Clojure's stability!

I bet you are thinking of virtual thread + GC

Don't use the v-word to me! 😄

I'm happy with my go blocks :)

I was curious to know what happened with @seancorfield and the "\/ things"

(Re) Written In Rust

ah, high performance outages

Everything is great until “organic” data gets involved.

What, did they unwrap in prod (again)?

Do inbox zero people really move/delete the e-mails from the inbox or just have a no-unreads-policy like adi?

I glance at new emails fairly often, which marks them read. If an email needs a response and I can dash it off in 30-60 seconds, I'll do it there and then. If it needs a longer response, it'll stay in my inbox until later in the day. If it can be read and deleted quickly, I'll do that. If reading would take a while, it'll stay in my inbox until later in the day. If it's purely information and I need to keep it for future reference, I'll move it to the appropriate folder. A couple of times a day, I set aside a block of time to read/reply to those unreads (and then either delete them or move them to a reference folder). So I tend to hit inbox-zero twice a day (at lunch time and at end of day), even if I don't hit it in between times.

I have 6 (read) emails in my inbox right now: 3 are "reminders for later in the day", 3 are "this requires a block of time to read". Several of those will go away at lunch time (in an hour or two), the rest will go away at the end of day.

Yikes, maybe I need to make a proof of concept and see how many bites it gets. @trost.mario would you consider that inbox a problem? Has it caused you any headaches? Or has ignoring it been perfectly fine/functional for you?

I don't consider it a problem: it's mostly subscriptions and ads that I just don't look at and don't delete. That being said: unsubscribing could help. It's also my private mail that I don't use much for correspondences.

My wife just made fun of me: she has only 99 unreads. Or so she thought... Turns out there wasn't enough space for more digits. On bigger screens she has 999 unreads 🙃

🤔 thinking some more about it, I would like to have inbox zero, just don't believe anymore it's something that fits my brain

But please announce any poc you create :)

"inbox zero" is def. a very specific subset of people right now. It's not for everyone. I don't know how big the market is for folks who want "inbox zero" but aren't organized enough to make it happen 🙂

Well it's like cleaning your room. Nobody wants to. But it feels really good after the fact.

And is probably good for you 😁

Thanks Ovi, I'll take a look.

To me it sounds like you underestimate the effort implicit in solving this and it feels the price should be higher. If you want some inspiration, I'd check http://Hey.com. It's a very cool spin on email. I enjoy it very much

Setting my view to "unread" takes care of "inbox-zero". State management: • Any unread email is a TODO • Any unread and pinned / starred is TODO first • Any "get to it later" is snoozed for a few hours to a few days, depending on how my day/week is looking • All notification-style emails are reviewed and immediately deleted --- they are rarely needed beyond a week ... and automatic trash collection kicks in every 30 days, so I have until then to undo the trashing • Visual indexing... All "mission-critical" email categories get labels using email rules (accountant, bank, domains, SaaSes, clouds etc...) So far, this has worked for me.

☝️ it reads like a lot but is hardly anything on a day-to-day basis. The "system" coalesced over the years around the oddities of my brain.

I think that's part of what makes email so interesting but also challenging. Email is communication. Email is a to-do list. It also at times smells like a wiki of sorts. And how all that gets organized is totally arbitrary based on how the user's brain works.

How's everyone's inbox doing?

Terrible!

still waiting for your technical solution to my personal problem

Oh! From reading your above comments, I didn't take away you perceived it as an actual problem.

Was I mistaken?

I find that even with ML models provided with Gmail and the usual suspects, our inboxes are still out of control and just pure chaos.

Also, there seems like little point to do this when you can just share your inbox with an LLM and have it clean this up for you.

But I'm wondering if there are large populations of non devs that don't want to fork their sensitive inbox data over to an LLM.

So maybe if my privacy policy is good, it'll appeal.

I've been an Inbox Zero person for years. Some people want to get there but really struggle. Most people just don't seem to care tho' -- I cannot imagine having more that a dozen emails sitting there but I know plenty of folks who have thousands... eek! I don't know whether those who "want but struggle" would pay... maybe a few would?

By the state of my inbox I'd say you're undervaluing it

you can bury me under my unread email when I go

Appreciate the feedback. I wonder if, along the same lines as email, I can also estimate how much regular reading a user has committed to (e.g. newsletters, blogs, etc), maybe get a rough estimate on how fast the user reads, and then let them know how large their overcommitment is based on what they are subscribed to (e.g. even if you were reading non-stop, you have no hope keeping up with all these updates). I can see that as seriously bolstering value.

The recurring theme of my ideas seems to center around helping users take back their attention and the peace they get from being organized and disconnecting.

I don't do "inbox zero" per se ... everything is in the inbox, but my default view filter is set to "unread" (and a mix of labels and filters helps with organisation / search)

Inbox Zero is a conspiracy from Big Email to reclaim all the free storage they promised me decades ago.