The notebooks aren't evaluated in reverse, but rather in the order they need to be to get the final results. Observable builds a DAG, similar to Marimo. You can put cells in any order you'd like.

I think that in all the notebook solutions I've seen that allow this, a culture emerges where the "final result" is put at the top so that you can find it easily and interact with it as a user. The actual development process involves writing stuff top down and then re-ordering it for use.

Most people really cannot tell you what they want in any reasonable way. So expecting good specs for software without a very laborious interview and review process is pure wishful thinking. People "know what they like when they see it", so spend time rapid prototyping.

Smaller and more recent: iTerm has deep tmux support. Just do `tmux -CC` to start your session or `tmux -CC a` to attach to it and you don't have to memorise all the tmux commands.

Also half of those people will "tell" you what you need to build and you need to work backwards from there to figure out what their actual problem is before working forward again to figure out what you actually need to build.

Dealing with this at work right now. A newly promoted lead is struggling to delegate and all of the work coming out of his team right now is instructions on how to do what they believe they want. Very frustrating!

> Most people really cannot tell you what they want in any reasonable way.

But build them something and suddenly they know exactly what they want and what you built isnt it.

This is the origin story of agile software development.

You can’t avoid building what they don’t want, so might as well do so as fast and cheap as you can.

Then the flip side is 'oh i love what you built'

uhh wait a min that was an utter rubish version. 'no no no its great'. now you are kind of stuck with it.

OP said they tried cursor and didn't experience a speedup over their vi macros.

Logseq is block-based while Obsidian is more focused on pages. If you want to build something like Wikipedia, Obsidian fits that well. If you're more used to notion and you think more in bullets, Logseq could be a better fit.

Yes. Obsidian resembles the classic desktop wiki while Logseq is more suitable for outlining. If the block-based approach to the problem is to your taste, that is.

This still relies on being able to name the notes. My point was that you can play the music without knowing the names, so you need some other system like yours to get from the notated signature to the name (or other way around).

I think there is true utility in choosing a unit scheme that matches your number scheme. So we use decimal numbers, makes sense to use decimal units. It seems you're arguing that the real mistake is using decimal numbers to begin with?

I have considered lessons but I didn't like the prospect of searching for a teacher. This particular piece of practice is only one part of my larger music-making activity. I make mostly electronic music using Ableton Live and a Push 2. I play guitar with enough proficiency that I don't feel like I need lessons. I started this sight reading excercise to access the sheet music I have and I'm using that just fine to learn pieces. So I guess I don't feel any particular frustration in my learning right now that would push me to ask for help. The main challenge I face in my music making is finding longer stretches of time to work on my songs.

I have found it immensely useful for quick GUI building on my phone.

Thank you, I will look into it

I have found this to be less boring than trying to plough through my copy of Hanon, since there is rapid feedback. It's a different kind of game. I struggle to get to 10 minutes of scales or Hanon stuff, but have no issue on the random notes.