a subpost about the hexist writeup
my blogposts fall into 3 main categories:
a devlog is basically 1 + 2, but there's this balance between staying true to the process and having it flow well
the hexist devlog is a tangle of moldy spaghetti and i want to put it off for as long as i can
actually
is lasagna a better analogy? cos there's layers of history relevant rainworld echo dialogue
then now i could amend the first sentence to say
the hexist devlog is a tangle pile of moldy spaghetti lasagna
but that'd skip out on the original spaghetti and my thought process about replacing it
i like to think that i'm a good editor, but my problem is that i edit way too stuff that isn't even relevant to the content
premature optimization, if you may originally used "bikeshedding" then immediately after decided to swap it out
something something cleanup pass
reader:
writer:
simplest impl would be to separate concise and history
so split an editor pane, edit the writeup and append to history at the same time
problem is that it is essentially the same content, just with different verbosity levels did i just go down a rabbithole trying to figure out how to add alt text so that i could make a -vvv joke apparently my unvisited link highlight as of 21/12/2024 is too low-contrast? fascinating
hmmm right yes, chronology
so history is the process of putting together the final concise writeup
but i think it's fun to read about the process too...
what if i'm looking at this the wrong way?
what if the format i need is one that allows me to express myself best?
this blog isn't for hosting documentation, it's for my logs of stuff-doing! so i should be writing in a way that im happy with
... and im definitely not happy with the hexist writeup as is, that's in need of a good de-molding
layers of history huh
ooooh page revisions would be nice
kinda like those fancy scp entries
dig up from the git history
though that makes typos weird
flag rev in commit message?
eh ill figure it out
TO BE CONTINUED (if i remember)
made with <3 and /.gen.sh