Just as an example DevTui and Lazugit are example of projects that are having a great TUI in the terminal - can be with multiple windows, tabs ...

Oh I am not saying you should change your project :) unless you see the same possible future.

Because I could be very wrong about it :P and we should have a big selection of dev tools.

Just here a train of thoughts which of course you should disregard :) cause it is your project:

If the future is more people staying the terminal then I think other people like me want to use their current terminal configuration and run things inside it :P

1 person data point of course :)

I am running also Clawdbot with it but I am a bit more weary of giving it access to personal stuff.

Only some open source repos, some CLIs, some tasks that can be public ...

If I would run it locally I will probably give it access to more.

Ah no yet. I am running it directly from Z.ai but I don't put any sensitive code/env vars there/tasks there.

I am planning to buy a MacMini and run it locally. Before doing that I started last week with trying it from Z.ai to see if it is worth the investment.

One question as I follow your project closely:
Is there any chance to run this in my terminal and not as a separate app? :)

Then the work is done by:
1. Either Clawd bot with Codex first with failover to GLM
2. OpenCode locally with GLM mostly
3. Sometimes Claude Code as a extra reviewer and fixer

I have multiple setups of working with LLMs:
For professional part: I mostly use Claude Code + Sourcegraph Deep Search + Neovim (without any AI/LLM addons) and Lazygit

For personal projects:
I mostly use Claude Code for planning and project managment

Registration link at luma.com/ps4gax1s

Yes, it would be a good fit for coding guidelines or AGENTS md files

It would make sense

These are very good and simple rules to follow. Thank you for sharing them

Oh yes, I remember this bug -> it is a good example about why units of measurements are important to be specified and verified

yes, thank you and @byroot.bsky.social for pitching in and sharing how you think about it. It is helpful for me (even if not practical) to try to find a logic in the syntax decisions.

I was thinking in the same way that while not being a method the behavior is similar in this case.

Yes. It is not a method.

But why do we have this syntax accepted? Usually some things like this have an explanation like: it is similar with, looks like other concept, makes sense because it makes something work in an expected way …

This is why I was thinking about being “similar” with a method

Thus if [] would be a method like Array[] or Hash[] then the syntax seems consistent.

I was trying to reason about what is the inspiration/logic to have this syntax.

I would say it is older than Rails sanitize_sql_array since that is already using it.

Not sure I understand the sanitize_sql_array. It receives as argument the entire code together with []

My idea was that is if [] would be a method on Kernel lets say (which is not) then the explanation to have this syntax would be:

Because we allow hash to be given to a method without {}

If you use Ruby maybe you might want to try this gem:
github.com/sporkmonger/...