Prediction: AI will make formal verification go mainstream
martin.kleppmann.com
Ty: A fast Python type checker and LSP
astral.sh
40 percent of fMRI signals do not correspond to actual brain activity
tum.de
Mozilla appoints new CEO Anthony Enzor-Demeo
blog.mozilla.org
Thin desires are eating life
joanwestenberg.com
The World Happiness Report is beset with methodological problems
yaschamounk.substack.com
Writing a blatant Telegram clone using Qt, QML and Rust. And C++
kemble.net
Chat-tails: Throwback terminal chat, built on Tailscale
tailscale.com
Sega Channel: VGHF Recovers over 100 Sega Channel ROMs (and More)
gamehistory.org
GitHub will begin charging for self-hosted action runners on March 2026
github.blog
Nvidia Nemotron 3 Family of Models
research.nvidia.com
MIT professor shot at his Massachusetts home dies
bbc.com
Show HN: Sqlit – A lazygit-style TUI for SQL databases
github.com
Artie (YC S23) Is Hiring Senior Enterprise AES
ycombinator.com
Creating custom yellow handshake emojis with zero-width joiners
blog.alexbeals.com
Rust GCC back end: Why and how
blog.guillaume-gomez.fr
Show HN: Deterministic PCIe Diagnostics for GPUs on Linux
github.com
How geometry is fundamental for chess
lichess.org
Is there any specification on how "far" a zero-width joiner can reach? I thought a ZWJ would only affect the codepoints directly adjacent to it, but here we have sequence of 5 codepoints and only one ZWJ for all of them (which is also the only codepoint that signals that "special treatment" should be applied here).
So how would a parser know all five codepoints make up a grapheme cluster and not just the inner three?
Edit: Ok, didn't realize the "Fitzpatrick" codepoints are modifiers that I guess always refer to the previous codepoint. So there is essentially an "operator precedence" defined between modifiers and ZWJs.