In exe.dev you have a subscription and you get some constant compute, paid whether used or not. that compute is shared between the vms. In shellbox every box has its own dedicated compute and if you don't use any, you don't pay.
Shellbox also gives an ipv6, an email endpoint, wakeup on the web endpoint, it supports nested virtualization, docker, etc. And... it is much cheaper even if you use it 24/7. Ahh and also you can send ssh exec commands, ssh forwarding, and more. It is "real" linux, like you get on classical vps providers
Anchor based editing requires injecting new anchors to the context, and dirac does so via a diff. So how is this more efficient (token-wise) than search and replace?? Even at a single token per hash. Also, code is read more than written so these just add up. I experimented once with stable anchors, albeit longer than a single token, and found it a downgrade.
My conclusion is that the efficiency dirac sees comes mainly from showing file skeleton by default
I'm not sure one way or another but I've been using a related tool called Tilth by another poster here. It doesn't do anchor-based editing, but it does do syntax-aware search and will e.g. report the line range for function definitions, provide file outlines with line numbers on a file name match, etc.
I have six patches that I will at some point upstream, the main bug/surprise is the .gitignore behavior is not what's documented, but even without it seems to work quite well.
> My conclusion is that the efficiency dirac sees comes mainly from showing file skeleton by default
how hard do you think it would be to bring this optimization to oh-my-pi and opencode? I am testing dirac and it's very cool but the tooling isn't there yet comparing to oh-my-pi in terms of UX.
Thinking back, I might have jumped the gun here. I can't objectively evaluate UX without spending more time with the tool. I'll try to daily drive it a bit before I can form an opinion.
reply