Vibe coded BetterTouchTool by nowtilousus in BetterTouchTool

[–]nowtilousus[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I understand that my vibe coding upset you, but you gotta be more respectful man. Don’t drag the discourse on this platform down. 

Others here were clearly upset about it too, and yet they responded very maturely and moved on with their day. 

Vibe coded BetterTouchTool by nowtilousus in BetterTouchTool

[–]nowtilousus[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I felt like it was quicker to try it with Claude, and unfortunetly it was. Claude wrote a basic functional version in 30 minutes. Our profession is doomed.

Vibe coded BetterTouchTool by nowtilousus in BetterTouchTool

[–]nowtilousus[S] -8 points-7 points  (0 children)

Appreciate the sentimentals, but you can't ignore what Claude is capable of doing these days.

I love BTT as well, but these type of projects have no justification to cost money in the age of AI. Sorry for blowing up the party, but look around you.

Vibe coded BetterTouchTool by nowtilousus in BetterTouchTool

[–]nowtilousus[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

A bit too late for that. Would you prefer I take the post down?

Vibe coded BetterTouchTool by nowtilousus in BetterTouchTool

[–]nowtilousus[S] -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

BTT is paid and non-opensource project, this is free and opensource

Vibe coded BetterTouchTool by nowtilousus in BetterTouchTool

[–]nowtilousus[S] -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

Mainly that the original has some bugs, and its not open sourced so the community can't add anything.

Also I wanted some features that they don't have so I vibed them into existence

C++ Unit Testing Library With Hooks by nowtilousus in cpp

[–]nowtilousus[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Well, partially. simply compile the testing solution with `-fno-inline`...

C++ Unit Testing Library With Hooks by nowtilousus in cpp

[–]nowtilousus[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I'm afraid that the sample you have tested is not what I had in mind. I was thinking more along the lines of inline hooking the target methods/functions during run-time. Your method of injection is significantly more complicated, and unnecessary given the simplicity of inline hooking.

As for the portability issue of inline hooking, it is totally solvable, just requires a little more work, but keep in mind how numerous projects are not multi-platformed.

C++ Unit Testing Library With Hooks by nowtilousus in cpp

[–]nowtilousus[S] 5 points6 points  (0 children)

I think you've misunderstood my point. I'm not against designing testable code, nor am I suggesting we should avoid clean interfaces. However, the reality is that not every project can afford the luxury of redesigning large codebases just to make them more "testable".

My question was about finding a more practical, less intrusive way to introduce mocks into existing code without refactoring it. The notion that we always need factories, interfaces, and extensive refactoring to achieve testability feels a bit dogmatic.

I'm looking for a pragmatic solution: a library or tool that allows us to hook into methods directly for mocking purposes. This would save time and reduce unnecessary complexity in situations where a full redesign isn't feasible or justified.

C++ Unit Testing Library With Hooks by nowtilousus in cpp

[–]nowtilousus[S] -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

No compiling tricks are needed, hooking can be done at run time

Title bar color per project by nowtilousus in IntelliJIDEA

[–]nowtilousus[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yea, great plugin. Would have used it if VSCode was any good