This is a really good introduction.

^(update: just added a new link)^

• Neovim supports multiple ways to fold: https://neovim.io/doc/user/fold.html
• marker based folding: https://neovim.io/doc/user/fold.html#fold-marker
• introduction what folding is: https://neovim.io/doc/user/usr_28.html#usr_28.txt

The way you describe and show it, is called foldmethod “marker”. The advantage of markers are, that they are built into the file. The disadvantage is, its built into the file. I rather like having the source independent from folding markers. The good news is, you can change the foldingmethod in Neovim and ignore the marker comments and instead use your own method.

A simple one is just “manual”, where you set what is foldable and not. There are some automatic ones, like based on indentation and such. I was never a folding guy anyway, so don’t really know all the differences when to use and how they differ. Neovim has following foldmethod: manual, indent, expr, syntax, diff, marker. The “expr” method even allows you a custom code and logic.

But this can lead to over engineering simple stuff. Which makes the code harder to read and maintain and more error prone. Especially if you don’t need all the other stuff for the class. Worse, if you define a class then you also tend to add more stuff you don’t use, just in case it might be useful.

A simple variable name is sometimes the better solution. But it depends on the situation off course. Sometimes a new class make things more clear, as it abstracts some complexity away. Yeah, we need to find a balance and that is different for every program.

My rule of thumb is, use short names if the context makes it clear. But do not make names too long and complicated (especially with Python :D). For me having unique names is also important, so I don’t get confused. So not only too similar names are bad, especially if they all start like “path_aaa”, “path_bbb” and such, then the eye can’t distinguish them quickly and clearly. And searching (and maybe replace) without an IDE is easier with unique and descriptive names.

Sometimes its better to come up with a new name, instead adding a modification and make the name longer. This could be in a for loop, where inner loops edit variables and create a variation of it. Instead adding something like “_modified”, try to find what the modification is and change from “date” to “now” instead “date_current”.

I use Thunderbird for a decade, not sure maybe less, but it feels like a long time. I use Thunderbird exclusively for mail. But feels like this is the wrong place to ask, isn’t it?

Also Thunderbird is Mozilla’s most successful product. Meaning it is self sustainable.

Oh now this looks so obvious! Thank you and it works. Man Python might has its shortcomings, but it can be so elegant and easy to do so complex stuff in short time.

Just as a side note, after I created this topic, was curious to ask a local programming LLM Ai model. I usually don’t use Ai, but was curious to if it could help here finding the solution. I provided the entire post and it gave me the correct answer, basically the same as yours. Just a curiosity.

Rewrite in Rust is not harmful.

Thanks, I see. I’ll research and learn more about the differences. Thought this was an writing error and didn’t research yet.

Netscape asked Brendan Eich to develop a scripting language that looks like Java, but be object oriented rather than class based.

I don’t understand this part. Isn’t object oriented also class based?? I mean that’s the entire reason why classes exist, to create objects. Isn’t it? How is this separated here?

Why not use simple bookmarks?

Exactly what I expected, from a “smaller company” who is dependent on the money of another bigger company. Maybe not only Google is forced to sell out their browser, what if Mozilla sells out Firefox too? Who would (want to) buy Firefox and be able to work on the code? My hope was the Linux Foundation, but it looks like they are also Chromium focused (with their recent financial support for that browser).

I miss moz://a.

At the moment though, there is no single likely alternative to Chrome’s dominance. But perhaps that’s for the better.

First off, why is it for the better not having no alternative? Secondly Firefox IS an alternative to Chrome.

BTW, this Magic Lasso is an ad blocker for Safari.