Automated commit

1 files changed, 2400 insertions, 0 deletions

diff --git a/2025/captions/emacsconf-2025-bookclub-tapas--bookclub-tapas--maddie-sullivan--main.vtt b/2025/captions/emacsconf-2025-bookclub-tapas--bookclub-tapas--maddie-sullivan--main.vtt
new file mode 100644
index 00000000..8e06a734
--- /dev/null
+++ b/2025/captions/emacsconf-2025-bookclub-tapas--bookclub-tapas--maddie-sullivan--main.vtt
@@ -0,0 +1,2400 @@
+WEBVTT captioned by sachac
+
+NOTE Introduction
+
+00:00:00.620 --> 00:00:04.159
+Alright! Hi everyone! Happy EmacsConf!
+
+00:00:04.160 --> 00:00:07.079
+I´m so excited to be here.
+
+00:00:07.080 --> 00:00:07.959
+It's surreal to be part
+
+00:00:07.960 --> 00:00:09.439
+of the conference itself,
+
+00:00:09.440 --> 00:00:11.239
+in addition to being a viewer.
+
+00:00:11.240 --> 00:00:13.879
+EmacsConf is like Christmas to me,
+
+00:00:13.880 --> 00:00:18.159
+and I'm so excited when it comes around every year.
+
+00:00:18.160 --> 00:00:21.119
+Today, my talk is on a programming methodology
+
+00:00:21.120 --> 00:00:23.999
+that I've created, discovered, stumbled upon.
+
+00:00:24.000 --> 00:00:26.439
+I call it "Bookclub Tapas."
+
+00:00:26.440 --> 00:00:27.759
+Before we get into that,
+
+00:00:27.760 --> 00:00:29.679
+let me introduce myself.
+
+NOTE Hi, I'm Maddie!
+
+00:00:29.680 --> 00:00:32.119
+My name is Maddie Sullivan,
+
+00:00:32.120 --> 00:00:34.239
+and my pronouns are she/her.
+
+00:00:34.240 --> 00:00:36.719
+I go by the handle ElephantErgonomics,
+
+00:00:36.720 --> 00:00:41.119
+which is shortened down to ElephantErgo in the IRC.
+
+00:00:41.120 --> 00:00:43.079
+You can reach out to me after the talk
+
+00:00:43.080 --> 00:00:44.959
+for questions, comments,
+
+00:00:44.960 --> 00:00:47.759
+or just to say hello by reaching out
+
+00:00:47.760 --> 00:00:56.959
+to hello@ElephantErgonomics.com.
+
+00:00:56.960 --> 00:01:00.039
+So this software development strategy I found,
+
+00:01:00.040 --> 00:01:03.839
+it's inspired by literate programming and Agile.
+
+NOTE Bookclub Tapas
+
+00:01:03.840 --> 00:01:07.439
+So what exactly is Bookclub Tapas?
+
+00:01:07.440 --> 00:01:09.439
+Bookclub Tapas is a conversation
+
+00:01:09.440 --> 00:01:11.719
+that you have with yourself.
+
+00:01:11.720 --> 00:01:13.479
+It's a log and a ledger,
+
+00:01:13.480 --> 00:01:16.519
+of your intentions, hopes, dreams,
+
+00:01:16.520 --> 00:01:17.119
+and what you've learned
+
+00:01:17.120 --> 00:01:19.719
+over the course of development.
+
+00:01:19.720 --> 00:01:22.799
+Bookclub Tapas is an oracle
+
+00:01:22.800 --> 00:01:24.199
+you can consult
+
+00:01:24.200 --> 00:01:26.933
+about the state of, and the strategies behind,
+
+00:01:26.934 --> 00:01:29.559
+your development process.
+
+00:01:29.560 --> 00:01:33.479
+Bookclub Tapas is also a peer programming partner
+
+00:01:33.480 --> 00:01:37.119
+that helps you decide how to best put forward your efforts
+
+00:01:37.120 --> 00:01:38.439
+and how to best pull together
+
+00:01:38.440 --> 00:01:40.399
+what you're working on.
+
+00:01:40.400 --> 00:01:42.719
+Bookclub Tapas will also help you to understand
+
+00:01:42.720 --> 00:01:45.239
+how to tailor scope to your needs,
+
+00:01:45.240 --> 00:01:46.759
+and how to have the best parts
+
+00:01:46.760 --> 00:01:49.399
+of your program shine through clearly.
+
+00:01:49.400 --> 00:01:52.159
+Bookclub Tapas consists of two parts:
+
+00:01:52.160 --> 00:01:54.159
+Bookclub and Tapas,
+
+00:01:54.160 --> 00:02:00.519
+but what does that mean exactly, though?
+
+NOTE Bookclub
+
+00:02:00.520 --> 00:02:04.719
+Bookclub is a reverse literate development strategy.
+
+00:02:04.720 --> 00:02:07.479
+Bookclub is a time for you to write,
+
+00:02:07.480 --> 00:02:08.959
+and then read and reflect.
+
+00:02:08.960 --> 00:02:10.719
+It's like a Bookclub,
+
+00:02:10.720 --> 00:02:12.559
+but it's for your program.
+
+00:02:12.560 --> 00:02:15.239
+Instead of inserting narration into your code
+
+00:02:15.240 --> 00:02:17.799
+to narrativize what you are accomplishing,
+
+00:02:17.800 --> 00:02:20.759
+you are instead inserting snippets of code
+
+00:02:20.760 --> 00:02:23.799
+into your narrative to make it come alive.
+
+00:02:23.800 --> 00:02:27.999
+So, what are we narrativizing, exactly?
+
+00:02:28.000 --> 00:02:30.439
+What sort of story are we telling?
+
+00:02:30.440 --> 00:02:34.319
+Bookclub is the story of you, your program,
+
+00:02:34.320 --> 00:02:36.559
+and how your efforts are allowing your program
+
+00:02:36.560 --> 00:02:40.299
+to come into the world.
+
+NOTE Too many hats, too many roles
+
+00:02:40.300 --> 00:02:42.479
+Software developers naturally have to wear
+
+00:02:42.480 --> 00:02:43.679
+a lot of different hats,
+
+00:02:43.680 --> 00:02:46.479
+and take on a lot of different roles.
+
+00:02:46.480 --> 00:02:48.159
+We apply ourselves into a lot
+
+00:02:48.160 --> 00:02:50.079
+of different contexts.
+
+00:02:50.080 --> 00:02:53.067
+We do research, interface architecture design,
+
+00:02:53.068 --> 00:02:55.519
+mathematics, philosophy.
+
+00:02:55.520 --> 00:02:57.679
+We take in the world around us
+
+00:02:57.680 --> 00:03:00.359
+and then build abstractions to model it.
+
+00:03:00.360 --> 00:03:01.799
+We translate the abstract
+
+00:03:01.800 --> 00:03:03.079
+into the concrete,
+
+00:03:03.080 --> 00:03:04.667
+and then when we're trying to teach software
+
+00:03:04.668 --> 00:03:05.999
+how to be "smart,"
+
+00:03:06.000 --> 00:03:07.239
+we translate the concrete
+
+00:03:07.240 --> 00:03:09.639
+back into the abstract.
+
+00:03:09.640 --> 00:03:11.500
+I can't help but feel like so much of
+
+00:03:11.501 --> 00:03:13.759
+what makes software development difficult
+
+00:03:13.760 --> 00:03:14.919
+is just trying to remember
+
+00:03:14.920 --> 00:03:16.679
+and keep track of everything.
+
+00:03:16.680 --> 00:03:17.959
+We have to try and remember
+
+00:03:17.960 --> 00:03:21.259
+so many different implementation details.
+
+00:03:21.260 --> 00:03:24.159
+We have to remember how our own code works,
+
+00:03:24.160 --> 00:03:26.679
+how the API of our dependencies work,
+
+00:03:26.680 --> 00:03:29.479
+how relevant real-world constraints behave,
+
+00:03:29.480 --> 00:03:31.319
+what the standards lay out,
+
+00:03:31.320 --> 00:03:34.159
+and how our data structures are laid out.
+
+00:03:34.160 --> 00:03:35.079
+When we're debugging,
+
+00:03:35.080 --> 00:03:37.519
+we simultaneously have to remember
+
+00:03:37.520 --> 00:03:40.239
+how our program is currently behaving,
+
+00:03:40.240 --> 00:03:42.679
+as well as how the program ought to behave
+
+00:03:42.680 --> 00:03:43.719
+in order to get a chance
+
+00:03:43.720 --> 00:03:46.039
+to reconcile that gap.
+
+00:03:46.040 --> 00:03:47.999
+It's honestly all way too much.
+
+00:03:48.000 --> 00:03:50.239
+We need a ledger of what we're actually doing
+
+00:03:50.240 --> 00:03:55.799
+in order to stay sane.
+
+NOTE Narrativiation
+
+00:03:55.800 --> 00:03:57.333
+I think a really effective way to
+
+00:03:57.334 --> 00:03:59.599
+make sense of things that are complex and important
+
+00:03:59.600 --> 00:04:01.039
+is to narrativize them,
+
+00:04:01.040 --> 00:04:02.839
+to turn them into stories.
+
+00:04:02.840 --> 00:04:06.039
+This is a strategy that humans have been using for a long time.
+
+00:04:06.040 --> 00:04:08.559
+Mnemonic devices, metaphors,
+
+00:04:08.560 --> 00:04:09.759
+and drawing parallels
+
+00:04:09.760 --> 00:04:12.199
+are all different ways of doing just this.
+
+00:04:12.200 --> 00:04:14.799
+Telling stories helps us to understand
+
+00:04:14.800 --> 00:04:16.359
+things that are big and complex
+
+00:04:16.360 --> 00:04:19.119
+by grounding them in our own experience
+
+00:04:19.120 --> 00:04:23.979
+and making it fit into our scale.
+
+00:04:23.980 --> 00:04:25.799
+So because the way that everyone
+
+00:04:25.800 --> 00:04:26.919
+naturally tells stories
+
+00:04:26.920 --> 00:04:28.239
+is going to be a little different,
+
+00:04:28.240 --> 00:04:30.067
+because the details that strike us
+
+00:04:30.068 --> 00:04:32.119
+as important and worth focusing on
+
+00:04:32.120 --> 00:04:34.239
+are going to be different for different people,
+
+00:04:34.240 --> 00:04:35.639
+I'm not going to say
+
+00:04:35.640 --> 00:04:36.799
+that there are hard and fast rules
+
+00:04:36.800 --> 00:04:39.359
+about how Bookclub "should work,"
+
+00:04:39.360 --> 00:04:41.133
+because how it "should work"
+
+00:04:41.134 --> 00:04:43.919
+is however it best fits your needs.
+
+00:04:43.920 --> 00:04:45.879
+Different people and different projects
+
+00:04:45.880 --> 00:04:47.559
+have different backgrounds and mindsets.
+
+00:04:47.560 --> 00:04:49.633
+And I don't think it's my place to say
+
+00:04:49.634 --> 00:04:51.879
+what strategy is correct as a universal law.
+
+00:04:51.880 --> 00:04:54.719
+You know, because Bookclub Tapas is, after all,
+
+00:04:54.720 --> 00:04:57.099
+just something I've sort of stumbled into.
+
+00:04:57.100 --> 00:05:00.039
+Bookclub is intrinsically ad-hoc.
+
+00:05:00.040 --> 00:05:02.159
+My providing a prescription of strategy
+
+00:05:02.160 --> 00:05:04.839
+is basically going to begin and end with the idea
+
+00:05:04.840 --> 00:05:07.519
+that you write a reverse-literate document
+
+00:05:07.520 --> 00:05:08.799
+that illustrates how you've gone
+
+00:05:08.800 --> 00:05:11.919
+about writing your program.
+
+00:05:11.920 --> 00:05:14.519
+All of that being said,
+
+00:05:14.520 --> 00:05:16.319
+I'm going to talk about
+
+00:05:16.320 --> 00:05:18.439
+how I've laid out my book club files
+
+00:05:18.440 --> 00:05:20.399
+and why I think this is a solid place
+
+00:05:20.400 --> 00:05:24.779
+from which to get started.
+
+NOTE My starter kit - My stock, off the shelf suggestions
+
+00:05:24.780 --> 00:05:27.839
+So my stock off-the-shelf suggestions
+
+00:05:27.840 --> 00:05:29.079
+for just getting started
+
+00:05:29.080 --> 00:05:32.960
+is to have sections for: our overarching goal,
+
+00:05:32.961 --> 00:05:35.059
+our development goals,
+
+00:05:35.060 --> 00:05:40.699
+a place for scratch work, a test suite, research,
+
+00:05:40.700 --> 00:05:42.467
+and then finally sections for variables,
+
+00:05:42.468 --> 00:05:47.659
+functions, and macros.
+
+NOTE Now what?
+
+00:05:47.660 --> 00:05:49.999
+So we have our starter kit sections.
+
+00:05:50.000 --> 00:05:51.959
+How do we go about using them?
+
+00:05:51.960 --> 00:05:53.639
+How do we get started?
+
+00:05:53.640 --> 00:05:55.319
+Well, we write them, you know,
+
+00:05:55.320 --> 00:05:56.439
+out in our org document,
+
+00:05:56.440 --> 00:05:58.979
+but then what do we do?
+
+NOTE Our overarching goal
+
+00:05:58.980 --> 00:06:01.599
+We start by writing what we know.
+
+00:06:01.600 --> 00:06:04.219
+We have a spark, a vision.
+
+00:06:04.220 --> 00:06:05.839
+We had the beginning of an idea
+
+00:06:05.840 --> 00:06:08.079
+of what we wanted our program to do.
+
+00:06:08.080 --> 00:06:09.839
+Alternatively, maybe we had
+
+00:06:09.840 --> 00:06:10.879
+a client lay our goals out.
+
+00:06:10.880 --> 00:06:13.299
+Either way, we have some idea
+
+00:06:13.300 --> 00:06:15.439
+of how we want our program to be shaped.
+
+00:06:15.440 --> 00:06:18.339
+Let's start by writing that down.
+
+00:06:18.340 --> 00:06:19.439
+What are we trying to do?
+
+00:06:19.440 --> 00:06:23.459
+What is our goal?
+
+NOTE Our development focuses
+
+00:06:23.460 --> 00:06:26.279
+After that, we're probably wondering to ourselves,
+
+00:06:26.280 --> 00:06:27.759
+"Okay, we have our goal,
+
+00:06:27.760 --> 00:06:30.079
+but how do we get there?"
+
+00:06:30.080 --> 00:06:31.359
+That's when we start writing
+
+00:06:31.360 --> 00:06:33.359
+our development focuses.
+
+00:06:33.360 --> 00:06:35.159
+If we have bursts of intuition
+
+00:06:35.160 --> 00:06:36.919
+about what functions to write,
+
+00:06:36.920 --> 00:06:39.799
+questions that we want to answer through research,
+
+00:06:39.800 --> 00:06:43.339
+we start enumerating those every time they hit us.
+
+00:06:43.340 --> 00:06:44.559
+Our goal is to write them
+
+00:06:44.560 --> 00:06:46.199
+all down in a checklist
+
+00:06:46.200 --> 00:06:48.159
+in order to turn them from daydreams
+
+00:06:48.160 --> 00:06:50.479
+into courses of action.
+
+00:06:50.480 --> 00:06:52.439
+If we aren't having development focuses
+
+00:06:52.440 --> 00:06:54.799
+hit us right away, that's okay.
+
+00:06:54.800 --> 00:06:57.279
+If we just stare at the goal for long enough,
+
+00:06:57.280 --> 00:06:58.319
+I think it's inevitable
+
+00:06:58.320 --> 00:06:59.559
+that the muse will speak,
+
+00:06:59.560 --> 00:07:00.879
+and we'll get a clear lead
+
+00:07:00.880 --> 00:07:05.119
+on a path forward.
+
+NOTE The rest of the headings
+
+00:07:05.120 --> 00:07:07.219
+So now what?
+
+00:07:07.220 --> 00:07:09.899
+Now that we have our development focuses,
+
+00:07:09.900 --> 00:07:11.759
+we want to go ahead and create
+
+00:07:11.760 --> 00:07:13.439
+the rest of the headings for ourselves
+
+00:07:13.440 --> 00:07:15.539
+so we can act upon them.
+
+00:07:15.540 --> 00:07:17.239
+We go ahead and write the rest
+
+00:07:17.240 --> 00:07:19.419
+of the file's structure ad-hoc
+
+00:07:19.420 --> 00:07:22.339
+in a way that will serve our needs for now.
+
+00:07:22.340 --> 00:07:24.079
+If it's not fitting us well later on,
+
+00:07:24.080 --> 00:07:25.279
+we can just go ahead and change it.
+
+00:07:25.280 --> 00:07:26.239
+There's no pressure.
+
+00:07:26.240 --> 00:07:27.719
+That's the beauty of having this
+
+00:07:27.720 --> 00:07:30.099
+all be in a plain Org document.
+
+00:07:30.100 --> 00:07:32.079
+If we're doing something consistently,
+
+00:07:32.080 --> 00:07:35.059
+we probably want to have a heading for it.
+
+00:07:35.060 --> 00:07:36.439
+We'll go ahead and create homes
+
+00:07:36.440 --> 00:07:38.919
+for our variables, our functions, our macros.
+
+00:07:38.920 --> 00:07:41.479
+We'll want to create a spot for scratch work
+
+00:07:41.480 --> 00:07:43.319
+to sort of like stretch our legs
+
+00:07:43.320 --> 00:07:45.399
+and lament in a stream-of-consciousness
+
+00:07:45.400 --> 00:07:47.079
+sort of format about how
+
+00:07:47.080 --> 00:07:50.159
+a particular piece of design ought to work.
+
+00:07:50.160 --> 00:07:52.359
+Basically, any time we wear a different "hat"
+
+00:07:52.360 --> 00:07:55.079
+or we take on a different "role" as a developer,
+
+00:07:55.080 --> 00:07:58.839
+it's worth considering creating a category for it.
+
+00:07:58.840 --> 00:08:00.719
+The best way for us to figure out
+
+00:08:00.720 --> 00:08:01.839
+what headings to fill in,
+
+00:08:01.840 --> 00:08:03.359
+and how to fill them in,
+
+00:08:03.360 --> 00:08:07.919
+is to just go ahead and act upon our development goals.
+
+00:08:07.920 --> 00:08:09.959
+If we have a question we want to answer,
+
+00:08:09.960 --> 00:08:12.519
+we'll want to create a Research heading
+
+00:08:12.520 --> 00:08:14.759
+so we can go ahead and have a spot
+
+00:08:14.760 --> 00:08:17.419
+for scratch-work for reasoning things out.
+
+00:08:17.420 --> 00:08:18.919
+If we want to write the first draft
+
+00:08:18.920 --> 00:08:20.679
+of a function we want,
+
+00:08:20.680 --> 00:08:22.799
+We'll want to create a heading for functions
+
+00:08:22.800 --> 00:08:37.979
+and then a sub-heading for that function in particular.
+
+NOTE Conversationality
+
+00:08:37.980 --> 00:08:40.419
+So now that we've filled in our sections,
+
+00:08:40.420 --> 00:08:42.379
+what do we do now?
+
+00:08:42.380 --> 00:08:43.679
+Our idea for a program
+
+00:08:43.680 --> 00:08:44.879
+has been turned into a story,
+
+00:08:44.880 --> 00:08:47.619
+but what does that actually get us?
+
+00:08:47.620 --> 00:08:50.839
+To me, a lot of what's exciting about Bookclub
+
+00:08:50.840 --> 00:08:52.919
+is that novelization goes in
+
+00:08:52.920 --> 00:08:56.059
+and a peer programming partner comes out.
+
+00:08:56.060 --> 00:08:58.359
+As we loop through reviewing our document,
+
+00:08:58.360 --> 00:08:59.799
+as we scan it up and down,
+
+00:08:59.800 --> 00:09:02.000
+we're able to engage in conversationality
+
+00:09:02.001 --> 00:09:04.999
+with our past self because of how verbose
+
+00:09:05.000 --> 00:09:06.499
+we've been in our notes.
+
+00:09:06.500 --> 00:09:08.439
+We can ask our past self questions,
+
+00:09:08.440 --> 00:09:09.879
+and get back answers.
+
+00:09:09.880 --> 00:09:11.979
+We've turned our past self
+
+00:09:11.980 --> 00:09:14.579
+into a peer programming partner.
+
+00:09:14.580 --> 00:09:16.359
+If we're wondering what to do next,
+
+00:09:16.360 --> 00:09:18.319
+we can check our Development Focuses.
+
+00:09:18.320 --> 00:09:20.759
+If we're wondering how something works,
+
+00:09:20.760 --> 00:09:22.199
+we can read documentation
+
+00:09:22.200 --> 00:09:24.719
+embedded in our function drafts,
+
+00:09:24.720 --> 00:09:26.919
+or we can read the outcomes of tests
+
+00:09:26.920 --> 00:09:28.659
+that we've performed in our research.
+
+00:09:28.660 --> 00:09:33.019
+We can ask ourselves questions and get answers.
+
+00:09:33.020 --> 00:09:34.439
+Some of what's most exciting
+
+00:09:34.440 --> 00:09:35.919
+about peer programming to me
+
+00:09:35.920 --> 00:09:38.079
+is having fresh perspective
+
+00:09:38.080 --> 00:09:41.079
+and alternate context.
+
+00:09:41.080 --> 00:09:42.679
+We have a fresh set of eyes
+
+00:09:42.680 --> 00:09:44.439
+on the program that aren't our own,
+
+00:09:44.440 --> 00:09:47.479
+and with that set of eyes
+
+00:09:47.480 --> 00:09:50.199
+comes someone else to share the burden
+
+00:09:50.200 --> 00:09:52.539
+of trying to remember everything.
+
+00:09:52.540 --> 00:09:54.839
+With Bookclub, instead of having
+
+00:09:54.840 --> 00:09:57.559
+a peer programmer that exists in physical space,
+
+00:09:57.560 --> 00:10:00.719
+we have one that's, to get all sci-fi for a moment,
+
+00:10:00.720 --> 00:10:03.039
+reaching forward towards us
+
+00:10:03.040 --> 00:10:04.999
+from backward in time.
+
+00:10:05.000 --> 00:10:06.799
+We're asynchronously working
+
+00:10:06.800 --> 00:10:08.119
+with our past selves
+
+00:10:08.120 --> 00:10:10.439
+as an equal-role collaborative
+
+00:10:10.440 --> 00:10:12.879
+partner in development.
+
+00:10:12.880 --> 00:10:15.039
+We have their perspective,
+
+00:10:15.040 --> 00:10:17.799
+their fresh memories of the code as it was written,
+
+00:10:17.800 --> 00:10:20.959
+and their focus on what was worth worrying about
+
+00:10:20.960 --> 00:10:22.319
+at a different point in time.
+
+00:10:22.320 --> 00:10:24.959
+We can ask them questions and get answers.
+
+00:10:24.960 --> 00:10:26.319
+We can ask them questions like,
+
+00:10:26.320 --> 00:10:28.199
+well, "What do I do now?"
+
+00:10:28.200 --> 00:10:30.419
+"How does this data structure work?"
+
+00:10:30.420 --> 00:10:33.679
+"What types does this third-party library take?"
+
+00:10:33.680 --> 00:10:35.119
+By asking these questions,
+
+00:10:35.120 --> 00:10:36.319
+I can even stay fresh
+
+00:10:36.320 --> 00:10:37.479
+on development progress
+
+00:10:37.480 --> 00:10:40.099
+that I last touched months ago.
+
+00:10:40.100 --> 00:10:42.799
+It's really easy to duplicate work,
+
+00:10:42.800 --> 00:10:44.719
+forget how things work,
+
+00:10:44.720 --> 00:10:46.159
+lose track of priorities.
+
+00:10:46.160 --> 00:10:48.279
+Bookclub helps keep us focused,
+
+00:10:48.280 --> 00:10:49.839
+it keeps us accountable,
+
+00:10:49.840 --> 00:10:55.479
+it even keeps us company.
+
+NOTE Ad-hoc means lesricsf tion
+
+00:10:55.480 --> 00:10:58.359
+One of the most immediately useful things about Bookclub,
+
+00:10:58.360 --> 00:11:00.867
+in my opinion, is that we immediately have
+
+00:11:00.868 --> 00:11:02.359
+a list of actionable items.
+
+00:11:02.360 --> 00:11:04.319
+Every time I have a little pain point,
+
+00:11:04.320 --> 00:11:06.639
+I go ahead and write it down,
+
+00:11:06.640 --> 00:11:09.079
+and I write down all of the things
+
+00:11:09.080 --> 00:11:11.579
+that would be nice to have done someday.
+
+00:11:11.580 --> 00:11:13.199
+So you might be wondering,
+
+00:11:13.200 --> 00:11:14.679
+and it's fair to wonder this,
+
+00:11:14.680 --> 00:11:17.479
+isn't this effectively just the GitHub issue model?
+
+00:11:17.480 --> 00:11:19.279
+We're listing out bug requests,
+
+00:11:19.280 --> 00:11:21.239
+issue requests, feature requests.
+
+00:11:21.240 --> 00:11:22.519
+It's not exactly a new idea,
+
+00:11:22.520 --> 00:11:24.559
+and it's pretty intuitive.
+
+00:11:24.560 --> 00:11:26.719
+I think the important consideration here
+
+00:11:26.720 --> 00:11:29.999
+is that having really formalized apparatus
+
+00:11:30.000 --> 00:11:31.639
+for entering in our thoughts
+
+00:11:31.640 --> 00:11:34.419
+can be an unnecessary source of friction.
+
+00:11:34.420 --> 00:11:36.359
+Bug listings don't tend to be
+
+00:11:36.360 --> 00:11:37.839
+a great fit for daydreaming
+
+00:11:37.840 --> 00:11:40.939
+or verbose considerations of philosophy.
+
+00:11:40.940 --> 00:11:42.919
+Bug listings tend to be reserved
+
+00:11:42.920 --> 00:11:45.119
+for catastrophes.
+
+00:11:45.120 --> 00:11:47.279
+I feel like a lot of the tooling
+
+00:11:47.280 --> 00:11:48.199
+that we currently use
+
+00:11:48.200 --> 00:11:51.279
+really struggles with creating ergonomics
+
+00:11:51.280 --> 00:11:54.879
+that make taking frictionless notes difficult.
+
+00:11:54.880 --> 00:11:57.159
+We have systems where all the disparate
+
+00:11:57.160 --> 00:11:59.079
+parts of what we're working on
+
+00:11:59.080 --> 00:12:02.499
+feel really far away from each other.
+
+00:12:02.500 --> 00:12:04.039
+We're pushed away from engaging
+
+00:12:04.040 --> 00:12:05.959
+in conversations with ourselves
+
+00:12:05.960 --> 00:12:07.919
+as a result of how disparate
+
+00:12:07.920 --> 00:12:09.159
+all of our tooling feels,
+
+00:12:09.160 --> 00:12:10.959
+how the process of working with it
+
+00:12:10.960 --> 00:12:12.899
+is incongruent.
+
+00:12:12.900 --> 00:12:15.599
+My hope is that we can instead
+
+00:12:15.600 --> 00:12:16.999
+engage with a process
+
+00:12:17.000 --> 00:12:18.359
+that makes it really trivial
+
+00:12:18.360 --> 00:12:20.199
+to write impulsive journaling
+
+00:12:20.200 --> 00:12:21.979
+about what we're doing.
+
+00:12:21.980 --> 00:12:23.839
+So much of design is ultimately
+
+00:12:23.840 --> 00:12:25.559
+just daydreaming.
+
+00:12:25.560 --> 00:12:27.279
+Good ideas tend to strike us hard,
+
+00:12:27.280 --> 00:12:29.779
+in a momentary flash of inspiration,
+
+00:12:29.780 --> 00:12:32.599
+and then they fade just as quickly.
+
+00:12:32.600 --> 00:12:35.239
+Anyone who's had an idea all at once
+
+00:12:35.240 --> 00:12:36.579
+in the middle of the night
+
+00:12:36.580 --> 00:12:38.159
+knows that they're going to have to choose
+
+00:12:38.160 --> 00:12:40.619
+between either committing to writing it down
+
+00:12:40.620 --> 00:12:41.959
+or accept that by morning
+
+00:12:41.960 --> 00:12:44.259
+they'll have lost it.
+
+00:12:44.260 --> 00:12:45.359
+If we're not writing
+
+00:12:45.360 --> 00:12:46.759
+what strikes us as important
+
+00:12:46.760 --> 00:12:48.639
+at the same moment that it's happening,
+
+00:12:48.640 --> 00:12:50.379
+we're going to lose it.
+
+00:12:50.380 --> 00:12:52.639
+It's not realistic to expect ourselves
+
+00:12:52.640 --> 00:12:54.519
+to hold onto our ideas forever
+
+00:12:54.520 --> 00:12:56.359
+with the same precision
+
+00:12:56.360 --> 00:13:01.919
+as when we were first inspired.
+
+NOTE Gratis documentation
+
+00:13:01.920 --> 00:13:11.319
+Okay. I'm gonna call you out real quick.
+
+00:13:11.320 --> 00:13:13.759
+If I ask all of you "Who wants to read
+
+00:13:13.760 --> 00:13:15.959
+really excellent documentation?"
+
+00:13:15.960 --> 00:13:17.079
+I imagine that everyone here
+
+00:13:17.080 --> 00:13:18.379
+is raising their hand.
+
+00:13:18.380 --> 00:13:20.759
+We want code to make sense
+
+00:13:20.760 --> 00:13:21.959
+and we want to know what
+
+00:13:21.960 --> 00:13:24.239
+the original developer had in mind.
+
+00:13:24.240 --> 00:13:26.399
+Even the original developer themselves
+
+00:13:26.400 --> 00:13:28.579
+would want this just for their own sake.
+
+00:13:28.580 --> 00:13:30.999
+I know that for me, I can even feel
+
+00:13:31.000 --> 00:13:32.319
+things becoming less fresh
+
+00:13:32.320 --> 00:13:33.759
+just after a couple months away
+
+00:13:33.760 --> 00:13:35.539
+from my codebase.
+
+00:13:35.540 --> 00:13:38.619
+And that was me from a couple months ago.
+
+00:13:38.620 --> 00:13:42.359
+They're not around anymore.
+
+00:13:42.360 --> 00:13:45.359
+Now, here's the rough part.
+
+00:13:45.360 --> 00:13:48.579
+Here's what I'm really gonna call you all out.
+
+00:13:48.580 --> 00:13:51.599
+"Who wants to write really excellent documentation?"
+
+00:13:51.600 --> 00:13:53.719
+Now, I don't know what's happening on your end,
+
+00:13:53.720 --> 00:13:55.559
+but I'm imagining crickets,
+
+00:13:55.560 --> 00:13:57.039
+silence, tumbleweeds
+
+00:13:57.040 --> 00:13:59.139
+blowing through to the horizon.
+
+00:13:59.140 --> 00:14:00.999
+It's a tough ask.
+
+00:14:01.000 --> 00:14:03.559
+It's not generally all that rewarding.
+
+00:14:03.560 --> 00:14:06.299
+If you're writing docs from scratch,
+
+00:14:06.300 --> 00:14:07.999
+a lot of it involves relearning
+
+00:14:08.000 --> 00:14:10.679
+the intentions behind crusty old code.
+
+00:14:10.680 --> 00:14:13.359
+For me, it hurts to not spend that same time
+
+00:14:13.360 --> 00:14:16.119
+implementing bug fixes and new features.
+
+00:14:16.120 --> 00:14:17.599
+It just doesn't feel like
+
+00:14:17.600 --> 00:14:19.619
+a great use of my time.
+
+00:14:19.620 --> 00:14:22.279
+Even if it's strictly for my own codebase
+
+00:14:22.280 --> 00:14:25.039
+for my own use, it's hard to sit down and do it
+
+00:14:25.040 --> 00:14:28.779
+even when I know how much I would benefit from it.
+
+00:14:28.780 --> 00:14:31.359
+My thinking is that when you write rough,
+
+00:14:31.360 --> 00:14:34.039
+piecewise daydreaming as you go,
+
+00:14:34.040 --> 00:14:36.039
+it's so much easier to not only
+
+00:14:36.040 --> 00:14:38.759
+begin writing documentation early in your process,
+
+00:14:38.760 --> 00:14:42.839
+but also to stay consistent about not slouching into
+
+00:14:42.840 --> 00:14:48.439
+an accumulation of a backlog.
+
+NOTE Keeping the thread of your intention
+
+00:14:48.440 --> 00:14:51.319
+So not only does writing documentation early
+
+00:14:51.320 --> 00:14:54.599
+make us more likely to keep that habit going,
+
+00:14:54.600 --> 00:14:56.399
+but it also makes the documentation
+
+00:14:56.400 --> 00:14:59.499
+we do write way more robust.
+
+00:14:59.500 --> 00:15:01.239
+When fiction meets reality
+
+00:15:01.240 --> 00:15:04.119
+and we start writing out code
+
+00:15:04.120 --> 00:15:06.119
+that is constrained by the real world
+
+00:15:06.120 --> 00:15:08.859
+and not just our imagination,
+
+00:15:08.860 --> 00:15:11.759
+we learn that things we assumed about our design
+
+00:15:11.760 --> 00:15:14.839
+aren't going to work out in practice.
+
+00:15:14.840 --> 00:15:16.879
+Because of this, we can enter
+
+00:15:16.880 --> 00:15:18.559
+into a sort of situation
+
+00:15:18.560 --> 00:15:21.139
+akin to boiling a frog in a pot of water.
+
+00:15:21.140 --> 00:15:23.079
+Frogs don't notice that they're being boiled
+
+00:15:23.080 --> 00:15:26.919
+if the water is only heated gradually enough.
+
+00:15:26.920 --> 00:15:31.099
+We decide to adjust our design only a little bit
+
+00:15:31.100 --> 00:15:33.919
+without changing the documentation right away.
+
+00:15:33.920 --> 00:15:34.999
+Doing that once is fine,
+
+00:15:35.000 --> 00:15:36.559
+but I don't believe for a second
+
+00:15:36.560 --> 00:15:38.559
+that we're only going to do it once.
+
+00:15:38.560 --> 00:15:39.919
+We can find ourselves surprised
+
+00:15:39.920 --> 00:15:41.659
+that as time goes on,
+
+00:15:41.660 --> 00:15:43.919
+our code looks nothing like our spec,
+
+00:15:43.920 --> 00:15:45.879
+and we lose the thread of what our code
+
+00:15:45.880 --> 00:15:48.699
+was supposed to do in the first place.
+
+00:15:48.700 --> 00:15:52.979
+When we stake our intentions clearly and early,
+
+00:15:52.980 --> 00:15:54.979
+you ground yourself in them.
+
+00:15:54.980 --> 00:15:58.439
+You reduce the risk of straying from them.
+
+00:15:58.440 --> 00:15:59.879
+You have clear reference
+
+00:15:59.880 --> 00:16:01.919
+for what you want your code to do,
+
+00:16:01.920 --> 00:16:03.319
+and you reduce the risk
+
+00:16:03.320 --> 00:16:05.919
+of having its purpose shift over time.
+
+00:16:05.920 --> 00:16:07.399
+When we take turns alternating
+
+00:16:07.400 --> 00:16:09.239
+between writing code and documentation
+
+00:16:09.240 --> 00:16:11.199
+rather than acting, you know,
+
+00:16:11.200 --> 00:16:14.319
+as having it all as one step,
+
+00:16:14.320 --> 00:16:16.479
+we risk taking turns just moving
+
+00:16:16.480 --> 00:16:21.499
+our goalpost back and forth.
+
+NOTE Bookclub is becoming too much
+
+00:16:21.500 --> 00:16:24.239
+So we've seen how our Bookclub files get us
+
+00:16:24.240 --> 00:16:25.839
+all sorts of amazing features
+
+00:16:25.840 --> 00:16:27.619
+and practical benefits.
+
+00:16:27.620 --> 00:16:29.599
+But we might be starting to notice a pattern
+
+00:16:29.600 --> 00:16:31.839
+as we continue to engage in conversation
+
+00:16:31.840 --> 00:16:33.839
+and work with our document
+
+00:16:33.840 --> 00:16:35.919
+and watch it grow in size.
+
+00:16:35.920 --> 00:16:38.819
+We originally created our Bookclub file
+
+00:16:38.820 --> 00:16:40.700
+with the hope to reduce
+
+00:16:40.701 --> 00:16:42.119
+what we would need to keep track of
+
+00:16:42.120 --> 00:16:44.879
+and to reduce our level of overwhelm.
+
+00:16:44.880 --> 00:16:48.919
+We might find that as our Bookclub file grows,
+
+00:16:48.920 --> 00:16:51.159
+we're encountering more detail
+
+00:16:51.160 --> 00:16:53.319
+than we can practically parse, manage,
+
+00:16:53.320 --> 00:16:55.759
+and decipher intention from.
+
+00:16:55.760 --> 00:16:57.719
+It can be easy to enter into a situation
+
+00:16:57.720 --> 00:16:59.839
+where we're drowning in the breadth of our notes,
+
+00:16:59.840 --> 00:17:03.399
+and in doing so we've recreated the same problem
+
+00:17:03.400 --> 00:17:05.419
+we originally set out to solve.
+
+00:17:05.420 --> 00:17:08.759
+Writing out every single detail helps us a lot
+
+00:17:08.760 --> 00:17:11.079
+to make sense of things at first,
+
+00:17:11.080 --> 00:17:13.519
+but then after a while, we can encounter
+
+00:17:13.520 --> 00:17:15.879
+a signal-to-noise problem
+
+00:17:15.880 --> 00:17:19.399
+when we try to make meaning from too many details.
+
+00:17:19.400 --> 00:17:25.239
+This is where tapas come in.
+
+NOTE Introducing Tapas
+
+00:17:25.240 --> 00:17:29.199
+So tapas in Spanish cuisine are appetizers.
+
+00:17:29.200 --> 00:17:31.559
+What's notable about tapas
+
+00:17:31.560 --> 00:17:33.839
+is that you can bring a bunch of them together
+
+00:17:33.840 --> 00:17:35.299
+to make a full meal.
+
+00:17:35.300 --> 00:17:38.379
+In the context of Bookclub Tapas,
+
+00:17:38.380 --> 00:17:40.339
+they serve a similar role.
+
+00:17:40.340 --> 00:17:42.719
+The idea is that we write flavorful libraries
+
+00:17:42.720 --> 00:17:45.419
+that together form a full program.
+
+00:17:45.420 --> 00:17:47.059
+We have a full program,
+
+00:17:47.060 --> 00:17:49.839
+but it's made from discrete modules.
+
+00:17:49.840 --> 00:17:52.719
+The idea behind tapas is that instead of creating
+
+00:17:52.720 --> 00:17:55.859
+one perfect, "solves everything" codebase,
+
+00:17:55.860 --> 00:17:57.319
+we want to create a whole bunch
+
+00:17:57.320 --> 00:17:59.079
+of separate libraries
+
+00:17:59.080 --> 00:18:02.919
+that themselves nail a specific subdomain.
+
+00:18:02.920 --> 00:18:04.119
+And once these libraries
+
+00:18:04.120 --> 00:18:05.179
+are all brought together,
+
+00:18:05.180 --> 00:18:08.019
+they form the whole that we're seeking.
+
+00:18:08.020 --> 00:18:10.079
+Once our Bookclub file becomes big enough
+
+00:18:10.080 --> 00:18:12.239
+such that we feel like our scope can be split
+
+00:18:12.240 --> 00:18:14.239
+into multiple libraries,
+
+00:18:14.240 --> 00:18:16.079
+that's when we want to take the opportunity
+
+00:18:16.080 --> 00:18:22.839
+to split our program up into parts, into Tapas.
+
+NOTE What are Tapas, what are Tapas not?
+
+00:18:22.840 --> 00:18:25.159
+So, maybe one of the best ways
+
+00:18:25.160 --> 00:18:27.039
+to understand what makes a good Tapa
+
+00:18:27.040 --> 00:18:30.599
+is to first examine what does not make a good Tapa.
+
+00:18:30.600 --> 00:18:32.159
+The single most important thing
+
+00:18:32.160 --> 00:18:33.559
+to understand about Tapas
+
+00:18:33.560 --> 00:18:37.139
+is that they themselves are substantial.
+
+00:18:37.140 --> 00:18:38.879
+There's a lot of back and forth
+
+00:18:38.880 --> 00:18:40.679
+on the idea of micro-libraries,
+
+00:18:40.680 --> 00:18:42.879
+their merits, their dangers,
+
+00:18:42.880 --> 00:18:45.419
+and when and where they kind of work best.
+
+00:18:45.420 --> 00:18:46.359
+I think the distinction
+
+00:18:46.360 --> 00:18:47.599
+that I would like to draw
+
+00:18:47.600 --> 00:18:50.719
+is that I think that tapas belong in the larger end
+
+00:18:50.720 --> 00:18:53.759
+of scale and complexity for microlibraries
+
+00:18:53.760 --> 00:18:56.159
+rather than the smaller end.
+
+00:18:56.160 --> 00:18:58.079
+I think particularly small helpers
+
+00:18:58.080 --> 00:19:00.299
+like NPM's is-odd
+
+00:19:00.300 --> 00:19:01.919
+are a good example of something
+
+00:19:01.920 --> 00:19:05.479
+I think does not constitute a good Tapa.
+
+00:19:05.480 --> 00:19:08.799
+Meanwhile, I think Python's Requests library
+
+00:19:08.800 --> 00:19:11.799
+is a really good example of a Tapa.
+
+00:19:11.800 --> 00:19:15.319
+I believe Requests only does HTTP connections,
+
+00:19:15.320 --> 00:19:18.319
+but I feel like that's not so simple and straightforward
+
+00:19:18.320 --> 00:19:20.239
+that you can just go ahead and implement it
+
+00:19:20.240 --> 00:19:23.199
+on your own real quick.
+
+00:19:23.200 --> 00:19:24.639
+A real danger of creating
+
+00:19:24.640 --> 00:19:27.219
+helper libraries that are too small
+
+00:19:27.220 --> 00:19:31.159
+is that we don't remove abstraction
+
+00:19:31.160 --> 00:19:33.319
+nearly as much as we postpone it.
+
+00:19:33.320 --> 00:19:35.819
+If our libraries are small,
+
+00:19:35.820 --> 00:19:38.899
+but the glue code that binds them is large,
+
+00:19:38.900 --> 00:19:40.079
+we haven't done anything
+
+00:19:40.080 --> 00:19:41.519
+to reduce complexity
+
+00:19:41.520 --> 00:19:44.179
+or employ abstraction in a meaningful way.
+
+00:19:44.180 --> 00:19:47.479
+If all of the complexity exists in our glue code,
+
+00:19:47.480 --> 00:19:49.799
+we've simply replaced our functions
+
+00:19:49.800 --> 00:19:52.519
+with libraries of the same size and purpose.
+
+00:19:52.520 --> 00:19:54.559
+Our codebase is still monolithic
+
+00:19:54.560 --> 00:19:58.039
+instead of having meaningfully divided scope.
+
+00:19:58.040 --> 00:19:59.559
+I think that a good Tapa
+
+00:19:59.560 --> 00:20:01.479
+ought to feel like augmentations
+
+00:20:01.480 --> 00:20:03.979
+or extensions to the standard library.
+
+00:20:03.980 --> 00:20:05.199
+You know, maybe something kind of
+
+00:20:05.200 --> 00:20:08.379
+akin to Scheme's SRFI system.
+
+00:20:08.380 --> 00:20:10.599
+I think that the goal of good Tapas
+
+00:20:10.600 --> 00:20:13.919
+is not to solve a particular problem,
+
+00:20:13.920 --> 00:20:18.519
+but instead to solve a particular class of problem.
+
+00:20:18.520 --> 00:20:20.159
+The goal of a well-written Tapa
+
+00:20:20.160 --> 00:20:22.999
+is to solve needing to do hard work in general
+
+00:20:23.000 --> 00:20:25.559
+rather than solving what can only really be
+
+00:20:25.560 --> 00:20:26.679
+an individual need
+
+00:20:26.680 --> 00:20:28.439
+of an individual program.
+
+00:20:28.440 --> 00:20:30.359
+I feel like Tapas are most helpful
+
+00:20:30.360 --> 00:20:32.119
+when we instead seek to solve
+
+00:20:32.120 --> 00:20:35.319
+a larger overarching problem
+
+00:20:35.320 --> 00:20:39.439
+that intersects with the problem space of our code base.
+
+00:20:39.440 --> 00:20:42.239
+When we have a handful of Tapas
+
+00:20:42.240 --> 00:20:46.179
+that are roughly the same size and scale,
+
+00:20:46.180 --> 00:20:48.119
+the glue code that marries them
+
+00:20:48.120 --> 00:20:52.179
+is also roughly the same size and scale.
+
+00:20:52.180 --> 00:20:55.639
+As a heuristic, I try to aim for any function
+
+00:20:55.640 --> 00:20:57.839
+being approximately 3 calls in length,
+
+00:20:57.840 --> 00:21:00.839
+and then any Tapa being between 6
+
+00:21:00.840 --> 00:21:06.399
+and 12 functions in length.
+
+00:21:06.400 --> 00:21:08.039
+The number of Tapas themselves
+
+00:21:08.040 --> 00:21:09.639
+can be as many or as few as you need,
+
+00:21:09.640 --> 00:21:12.879
+but then your Tapas can split into
+
+00:21:12.880 --> 00:21:16.459
+their own separate Tapas as needed.
+
+00:21:16.460 --> 00:21:18.799
+My hope is that the collection of our Tapas,
+
+00:21:18.800 --> 00:21:20.599
+especially as we create
+
+00:21:20.600 --> 00:21:22.319
+dependency chains among them,
+
+00:21:22.320 --> 00:21:25.039
+is that each next Tapa is a trivial case
+
+00:21:25.040 --> 00:21:27.099
+of the one prerequisite to it.
+
+00:21:27.100 --> 00:21:28.879
+Every Tapa is a meaningful,
+
+00:21:28.880 --> 00:21:31.059
+human-readable abstraction
+
+00:21:31.060 --> 00:21:33.439
+that enables us to feel confident about our tooling
+
+00:21:33.440 --> 00:21:35.639
+without drowning in detail.
+
+00:21:35.640 --> 00:21:38.499
+The whole stack can be understood by humans,
+
+00:21:38.500 --> 00:21:40.159
+but we only have to focus on
+
+00:21:40.160 --> 00:21:41.879
+any one piece of it at a time,
+
+00:21:41.880 --> 00:21:47.419
+rather than focusing on the entire stack all at once.
+
+00:21:47.420 --> 00:21:48.879
+We can practically achieve
+
+00:21:48.880 --> 00:21:51.259
+a huge final product,
+
+00:21:51.260 --> 00:21:52.759
+but each individual step
+
+00:21:52.760 --> 00:21:54.279
+in working towards that goal
+
+00:21:54.280 --> 00:21:56.039
+is still at a human scale.
+
+00:21:56.040 --> 00:22:02.179
+One thing I want to make sure to point out,
+
+00:22:02.180 --> 00:22:03.279
+one thing I want to make sure
+
+00:22:03.280 --> 00:22:05.179
+to point out explicitly, real quick,
+
+00:22:05.180 --> 00:22:06.279
+is that having access
+
+00:22:06.280 --> 00:22:07.839
+to a hygienic macro system,
+
+00:22:07.840 --> 00:22:10.259
+like the ones that we have in Lisps,
+
+00:22:10.260 --> 00:22:11.999
+makes for an amazing experience
+
+00:22:12.000 --> 00:22:13.319
+for creating Tapas.
+
+00:22:13.320 --> 00:22:15.279
+The types of abstractions that we can do
+
+00:22:15.280 --> 00:22:17.039
+by modifying syntax at compile time
+
+00:22:17.040 --> 00:22:18.439
+makes for incredibly intuitive
+
+00:22:18.440 --> 00:22:25.179
+and ergonomic tooling.
+
+NOTE Tapas are maybe best illustrated by example
+
+00:22:25.180 --> 00:22:27.279
+So we've talked quite a bit about
+
+00:22:27.280 --> 00:22:28.919
+what I think makes a Tapa good,
+
+00:22:28.920 --> 00:22:30.759
+but I think maybe the best way
+
+00:22:30.760 --> 00:22:32.679
+to understand the concept
+
+00:22:32.680 --> 00:22:35.599
+is to have a look at the whole workflow in practice.
+
+00:22:35.600 --> 00:22:37.479
+I've been working on this, currently
+
+00:22:37.480 --> 00:22:40.219
+unnamed, Elisp program recently.
+
+00:22:40.220 --> 00:22:42.959
+It's a validator for the filetags lines
+
+00:22:42.960 --> 00:22:45.819
+of my Org Mode files.
+
+00:22:45.820 --> 00:22:49.299
+So I have Org Mode files
+
+00:22:49.300 --> 00:22:50.999
+under my Documents directory,
+
+00:22:51.000 --> 00:22:53.633
+organized in this hierarchical way,
+
+00:22:53.634 --> 00:22:57.039
+and the nested directories have meaningful names.
+
+00:22:57.040 --> 00:23:00.300
+I want the headers of my Org files to be tagged
+
+00:23:00.301 --> 00:23:01.800
+in accordance with the sequence
+
+00:23:01.801 --> 00:23:04.199
+of the names of the directories.
+
+00:23:04.200 --> 00:23:06.167
+I do this by having the file-tags line
+
+00:23:06.168 --> 00:23:06.999
+at the top of the file
+
+00:23:07.000 --> 00:23:09.519
+just list the path segments in order.
+
+00:23:09.520 --> 00:23:12.199
+If I have an Org file in the directory
+
+00:23:12.200 --> 00:23:16.559
+"~/Documents/foo/bar",
+
+00:23:16.560 --> 00:23:20.799
+the file-tags line has the tags "foo" and "bar".
+
+00:23:20.800 --> 00:23:23.139
+This is totally fine to do by hand,
+
+00:23:23.140 --> 00:23:24.919
+but I want a program
+
+00:23:24.920 --> 00:23:27.119
+that recursively searches through my directories
+
+00:23:27.120 --> 00:23:29.799
+to validate that the tags are correct
+
+00:23:29.800 --> 00:23:33.459
+because it's easy to drop something.
+
+00:23:33.460 --> 00:23:36.039
+This scale of problem is actually kind of perfect
+
+00:23:36.040 --> 00:23:39.959
+for demonstrating how Bookclub Tapas work in action.
+
+00:23:39.960 --> 00:23:40.759
+We have a problem
+
+00:23:40.760 --> 00:23:42.639
+that's mostly rather simple,
+
+00:23:42.640 --> 00:23:44.359
+but it has a lot of moving pieces.
+
+00:23:44.360 --> 00:23:47.799
+We want to iterate over directories recursively,
+
+00:23:47.800 --> 00:23:49.559
+we want to do string manipulation,
+
+00:23:49.560 --> 00:23:50.879
+we want to parse buffers,
+
+00:23:50.880 --> 00:23:52.899
+and we want to edit buffers.
+
+00:23:52.900 --> 00:23:55.359
+All of these tasks are simple enough on their own,
+
+00:23:55.360 --> 00:23:56.679
+but it's deceptively easy
+
+00:23:56.680 --> 00:23:58.399
+to start tripping over ourselves
+
+00:23:58.400 --> 00:23:59.959
+when we feel like it's necessary
+
+00:23:59.960 --> 00:24:03.019
+to do all of these different things in one step.
+
+00:24:03.020 --> 00:24:05.399
+So there are a ton of great string
+
+00:24:05.400 --> 00:24:06.959
+manipulation tools for Emacs,
+
+00:24:06.960 --> 00:24:08.079
+so that's checked off,
+
+00:24:08.080 --> 00:24:10.939
+that's done, taken care of.
+
+00:24:10.940 --> 00:24:12.119
+I'm still kind of daydreaming
+
+00:24:12.120 --> 00:24:14.399
+about writing a wrapper around
+
+00:24:14.400 --> 00:24:16.039
+some of the Emacs standard libraries
+
+00:24:16.040 --> 00:24:16.999
+for directory traversal,
+
+00:24:17.000 --> 00:24:20.179
+just to make it a little bit nicer to work with.
+
+00:24:20.180 --> 00:24:20.799
+But the big thing
+
+00:24:20.800 --> 00:24:22.519
+that really struck me as odd
+
+00:24:22.520 --> 00:24:25.479
+is that there doesn't seem to be a great tooling
+
+00:24:25.480 --> 00:24:28.239
+for destructuring Emacs buffers
+
+00:24:28.240 --> 00:24:29.399
+beyond just chaining together
+
+00:24:29.400 --> 00:24:31.379
+a bunch of editor commands.
+
+00:24:31.380 --> 00:24:33.959
+Emacs is so buffer-oriented,
+
+00:24:33.960 --> 00:24:36.439
+I feel like it really deserves a good library
+
+00:24:36.440 --> 00:24:38.719
+for programmatic buffer destructuring.
+
+00:24:38.720 --> 00:24:40.559
+I looked around for a bit,
+
+00:24:40.560 --> 00:24:42.799
+but I couldn't really find anything.
+
+00:24:42.800 --> 00:24:44.759
+So at the end of the day,
+
+00:24:44.760 --> 00:24:47.279
+I could definitely just grit my teeth
+
+00:24:47.280 --> 00:24:50.919
+and put my head down and just use tools
+
+00:24:50.920 --> 00:24:54.359
+that feel cumbersome to work with if I wanted to.
+
+00:24:54.360 --> 00:24:55.199
+I could write something
+
+00:24:55.200 --> 00:24:56.039
+that's "good enough"
+
+00:24:56.040 --> 00:24:57.759
+just for the purpose of my package
+
+00:24:57.760 --> 00:25:00.279
+and then hide it deep inside the code base.
+
+00:25:00.280 --> 00:25:03.819
+I could absolutely do that.
+
+00:25:03.820 --> 00:25:07.919
+But I can't help but think about how
+
+00:25:07.920 --> 00:25:11.099
+after I properly write the tooling I'm missing,
+
+00:25:11.100 --> 00:25:13.159
+I'm really going to be thanking myself
+
+00:25:13.160 --> 00:25:15.879
+in terms of reduced implementational complexity,
+
+00:25:15.880 --> 00:25:19.039
+reduced bug hunting, real reusability,
+
+00:25:19.040 --> 00:25:22.199
+and ultimately really just a deep sense of pride
+
+00:25:22.200 --> 00:25:23.719
+in knowing that I took the time
+
+00:25:23.720 --> 00:25:27.319
+to do something in a way that feels "right."
+
+00:25:27.320 --> 00:25:28.799
+This right here is the perfect time
+
+00:25:28.800 --> 00:25:30.239
+to split off Tapas.
+
+00:25:30.240 --> 00:25:32.119
+Any time that we find ourselves
+
+00:25:32.120 --> 00:25:34.319
+reaching for a fictional dependency,
+
+00:25:34.320 --> 00:25:35.439
+wishing that someone had written
+
+00:25:35.440 --> 00:25:37.679
+a library like this...
+
+00:25:37.680 --> 00:25:39.119
+We can take that opportunity
+
+00:25:39.120 --> 00:25:42.019
+to remember that we are "someone."
+
+00:25:42.020 --> 00:25:44.319
+We can write that library ourselves,
+
+00:25:44.320 --> 00:25:46.679
+and we deserve to write that library
+
+00:25:46.680 --> 00:25:52.339
+because we deserve to get to use it.
+
+NOTE Introducing Squint
+
+00:25:52.340 --> 00:25:55.279
+So I'm going to briefly show
+
+00:25:55.280 --> 00:25:56.899
+a Bookclub buffer
+
+00:25:56.900 --> 00:25:59.259
+for a program called Squint.
+
+00:25:59.260 --> 00:26:00.879
+It's the buffer destructure
+
+00:26:00.880 --> 00:26:03.199
+that I've been talking about, and it's real.
+
+00:26:03.200 --> 00:26:04.519
+It's a wrapper around
+
+00:26:04.520 --> 00:26:05.999
+Emacs's narrowing functionality
+
+00:26:06.000 --> 00:26:08.739
+and regular expression search.
+
+00:26:08.740 --> 00:26:11.799
+It's not totally done,
+
+00:26:11.800 --> 00:26:15.279
+and will likely see some breaking changes,
+
+00:26:15.280 --> 00:26:16.759
+but I really like where it is.
+
+00:26:16.760 --> 00:26:18.679
+I'll be posting it in its current state
+
+00:26:18.680 --> 00:26:22.399
+on some of the big source repository sites
+
+00:26:22.400 --> 00:26:23.279
+relatively soon.
+
+00:26:23.280 --> 00:26:24.719
+I think it has a good feature,
+
+00:26:24.720 --> 00:26:26.519
+which is really quite exciting.
+
+00:26:26.520 --> 00:26:28.999
+And it'll likely probably get split off
+
+00:26:29.000 --> 00:26:29.799
+into its own Tapas.
+
+00:26:29.800 --> 00:26:32.239
+We'll see. No matter what,
+
+00:26:32.240 --> 00:26:34.319
+I do recommend being on the lookout for it,
+
+00:26:34.320 --> 00:26:35.599
+because I think it'll be
+
+00:26:35.600 --> 00:26:37.479
+a really excellent demonstration
+
+00:26:37.480 --> 00:26:39.679
+of some of the solid ideas
+
+00:26:39.680 --> 00:26:43.899
+behind how to get rolling with Bookclub Tapas.
+
+00:26:43.900 --> 00:26:46.639
+So I have my background section
+
+00:26:46.640 --> 00:26:49.039
+where I'm basically just sort of laying out,
+
+00:26:49.040 --> 00:26:53.239
+you know, what the objective is for the program.
+
+00:26:53.240 --> 00:26:55.119
+I have my vision where I'm doing
+
+00:26:55.120 --> 00:26:58.019
+some daydreaming about, you know,
+
+00:26:58.020 --> 00:26:59.639
+how this all ought to work.
+
+00:26:59.640 --> 00:27:00.919
+I date stamped this.
+
+00:27:00.920 --> 00:27:02.919
+As you can see, it's from a while ago,
+
+00:27:02.920 --> 00:27:05.599
+but I still have the full context of, you know,
+
+00:27:05.600 --> 00:27:08.159
+all the things that I've done working on this.
+
+00:27:08.160 --> 00:27:12.319
+I listed out a bunch of ideas
+
+00:27:12.320 --> 00:27:15.479
+for different forms for functions macros.
+
+00:27:15.480 --> 00:27:21.839
+I did different pieces of research.
+
+00:27:21.840 --> 00:27:23.199
+Yeah, I was trying to figure out
+
+00:27:23.200 --> 00:27:24.679
+for the width restriction macro,
+
+00:27:24.680 --> 00:27:26.599
+what types does it take?
+
+00:27:26.600 --> 00:27:28.479
+And I did a whole bunch of tests
+
+00:27:28.480 --> 00:27:31.279
+to try and ultimately figure it out.
+
+00:27:31.280 --> 00:27:35.719
+Because it claims in the documentation,
+
+00:27:35.720 --> 00:27:37.399
+I believe, that it will just take
+
+00:27:37.400 --> 00:27:39.439
+any type for labels.
+
+00:27:39.440 --> 00:27:43.959
+But in my testing, that's not
+
+00:27:43.960 --> 00:27:44.879
+ultimately what I found.
+
+00:27:44.880 --> 00:27:46.519
+The results of my tests
+
+00:27:46.520 --> 00:27:50.119
+is that symbols, numbers, they work.
+
+00:27:50.120 --> 00:27:51.319
+Strings do not.
+
+00:27:51.320 --> 00:27:52.919
+I'm not sure why that is.
+
+00:27:52.920 --> 00:27:54.439
+But for my purposes,
+
+00:27:54.440 --> 00:27:58.159
+this is what I need to know.
+
+00:27:58.160 --> 00:28:00.359
+I have my development focuses here.
+
+00:28:00.360 --> 00:28:03.879
+So I have my assorted goals
+
+00:28:03.880 --> 00:28:05.119
+for different directions
+
+00:28:05.120 --> 00:28:08.059
+I want to take the program.
+
+00:28:08.060 --> 00:28:13.339
+And then lastly, I have my functions, my macros.
+
+00:28:13.340 --> 00:28:14.439
+And this right here
+
+00:28:14.440 --> 00:28:18.079
+is the titular macro.
+
+00:28:18.080 --> 00:28:20.499
+This is ultimately the big meat
+
+00:28:20.500 --> 00:28:24.859
+of the program.
+
+00:28:24.860 --> 00:28:28.219
+And it's all contained happily organized
+
+00:28:28.220 --> 00:28:30.359
+inside my Bookclub file.
+
+00:28:30.360 --> 00:28:31.199
+I'm quite happy with it.
+
+00:28:31.200 --> 00:28:36.099
+I think it looks really nice.
+
+NOTE What else does Bookclub Tapas do?
+
+00:28:36.100 --> 00:28:40.759
+So what else does Bookclub tapas do?
+
+00:28:40.760 --> 00:28:44.519
+I don't know. It probably does a lot of stuff.
+
+00:28:44.520 --> 00:28:46.439
+It does all sorts of stuff
+
+00:28:46.440 --> 00:28:47.439
+that I don't know about yet,
+
+00:28:47.440 --> 00:28:48.879
+but this is where you come in.
+
+00:28:48.880 --> 00:28:51.439
+I'm really excited to see what people do
+
+00:28:51.440 --> 00:28:52.879
+when they take these ideas
+
+00:28:52.880 --> 00:28:54.019
+and run with them.
+
+00:28:54.020 --> 00:28:56.819
+And if you have something really cool you're doing with it,
+
+00:28:56.820 --> 00:28:59.239
+please email me and come talk to me about it.
+
+00:28:59.240 --> 00:29:00.599
+I'd love to hear about it.
+
+00:29:00.600 --> 00:29:08.159
+Again, my email is hello@ElephantErgonomics.com.
+
+NOTE Let's work together
+
+00:29:08.160 --> 00:29:10.839
+So last, before we wrap up,
+
+00:29:10.840 --> 00:29:12.599
+I want to go ahead and give
+
+00:29:12.600 --> 00:29:14.199
+a quick plug for my services.
+
+00:29:14.200 --> 00:29:17.019
+I am an independent software engineer
+
+00:29:17.020 --> 00:29:20.079
+that has an emphasis in backend design
+
+00:29:20.080 --> 00:29:21.599
+and general automation.
+
+00:29:21.600 --> 00:29:23.919
+In particular, I have an emphasis
+
+00:29:23.920 --> 00:29:26.839
+in that really cool new generative AI thing
+
+00:29:26.840 --> 00:29:28.559
+that everyone's been talking about recently.
+
+00:29:28.560 --> 00:29:30.679
+If you have a headache,
+
+00:29:30.680 --> 00:29:33.239
+you have some sort of pain point
+
+00:29:33.240 --> 00:29:34.799
+for your small or large business,
+
+00:29:34.800 --> 00:29:36.767
+you wish you could just wiggle your nose
+
+00:29:36.768 --> 00:29:38.999
+and have disappear, come talk to me.
+
+00:29:39.000 --> 00:29:41.599
+I'll make it disappear. I love doing that.
+
+00:29:41.600 --> 00:29:46.979
+Reach out to me at hello@ElephantErgonomics.com.
+
+00:29:46.980 --> 00:29:48.319
+If you think that Bookclub Tapas
+
+00:29:48.320 --> 00:29:51.039
+would be a great fit for your team and your project,
+
+00:29:51.040 --> 00:29:53.039
+I'd love to hop on and help you
+
+00:29:53.040 --> 00:29:55.119
+get the ball rolling quickly.
+
+00:29:55.120 --> 00:29:59.819
+Go ahead and email me at hello@ElephantErgonomics.com.
+
+00:29:59.820 --> 00:30:01.639
+Lastly, if you're a member
+
+00:30:01.640 --> 00:30:03.799
+of the larger Lisp community
+
+00:30:03.800 --> 00:30:06.859
+and you want to fund independent software development
+
+00:30:06.860 --> 00:30:08.319
+for things that really excite you,
+
+00:30:08.320 --> 00:30:09.639
+for passion projects
+
+00:30:09.640 --> 00:30:11.439
+that make our ecosystem richer,
+
+00:30:11.440 --> 00:30:17.079
+I'd love to look into accepting independent funding
+
+00:30:17.080 --> 00:30:20.419
+so I can commit more hours
+
+00:30:20.420 --> 00:30:22.679
+toward making that happen.
+
+00:30:22.680 --> 00:30:24.599
+Some of the projects that I want to work on
+
+00:30:24.600 --> 00:30:28.679
+are a Python Foreign Function Interface for Guile Scheme,
+
+00:30:28.680 --> 00:30:31.959
+a framework for rapidly creating simulation games
+
+00:30:31.960 --> 00:30:33.878
+that feels just as simple
+
+00:30:33.879 --> 00:30:36.239
+as writing Emacs configurations,
+
+00:30:36.240 --> 00:30:37.719
+I want to work on getting
+
+00:30:37.720 --> 00:30:41.459
+a full graphical web browser inside of Emacs,
+
+00:30:41.460 --> 00:30:43.359
+and I want to finish programs like Squint.
+
+00:30:43.360 --> 00:30:44.879
+These are just some of the projects
+
+00:30:44.880 --> 00:30:46.019
+I want to work on,
+
+00:30:46.020 --> 00:30:48.239
+but I need funding to do so.
+
+00:30:48.240 --> 00:30:49.559
+If you want to see these things happen,
+
+00:30:49.560 --> 00:30:53.799
+send me an email at hello@ElephantErgonomics.com
+
+00:30:53.800 --> 00:30:55.559
+with both your intention
+
+00:30:55.560 --> 00:30:57.359
+to pledge a monthly contribution
+
+00:30:57.360 --> 00:30:59.399
+as well as clarification,
+
+00:30:59.400 --> 00:31:02.079
+a sort of vote on which project
+
+00:31:02.080 --> 00:31:03.519
+you would like to see me prioritize.
+
+00:31:03.520 --> 00:31:06.679
+I would love to have folks reach out
+
+00:31:06.680 --> 00:31:07.519
+for any of these reasons.
+
+00:31:07.520 --> 00:31:12.199
+I would just love to talk to you.
+
+00:31:12.200 --> 00:31:14.619
+Thank you so much for watching!
+
+00:31:14.620 --> 00:31:16.519
+I really hope that the talk was interesting,
+
+00:31:16.520 --> 00:31:18.639
+and I'm really excited to see
+
+00:31:18.640 --> 00:31:19.719
+your thoughts and questions
+
+00:31:19.720 --> 00:31:21.959
+right now in the Q&A!
+
+00:31:21.960 --> 00:31:25.800
+Thank you so much for watching. Bye!