With peer review you do not even have a choice as to which reviewers to trust as it is all homogenized by acceptance or not. This is marginally better if reviews are published.
That is to say I also think it would be worthwhile to try.
I haven’t explicitly recreated a template for an academic venue, but I have recreated a custom template to match and existing PDF. It was pretty straightforward to recreate it as the language and “standard library” (if you could call it that?) is well designed and has excellent documentation.
95% of the layout? Trivial. The last 5%? Much harder. They’ve invested in their very specific latex template.
We probably could have done it but my coauthor is great with latex and figured converting the whole thing was probably easier than dealing with the political headache of making the organisers deal with a different format.
Do you maintain these projects or is this for greenfield development?
- Both, I have my own projects and client projects
Could you fix any bugs without Claude?
- Yes, I have decades of software development experience
Are these projects tested, who writes the tests. If it's Claude how do you know these tests actually test something sensible?
- For serious projects yes, I will define the test cases and have Claude build them out along with any additional cases it identifies. I use planning mode heavily before any code gets written.
Is anybody using these projects and what do users think of using these projects?
- Yes, these are real projects in production with real users :) They love them
Fair enough, also thinking about it some more. If you use that option the old 90% will usually be normalized to 100% so this might not even be helpful.
it's funny because you can buy old flagships on ebay and the battery craps out
but the replacement battery you buy is counterfeit like Lenovo Carbon for example
Fun fact: That long s accidentally lead to a new character being created.
In German, we've got words like "dass". Back in the day, every s that wasn't at the end of a word was written as long s, so "dass" would've been written like "daſs", which got turned into ß.
That's why until the recent orthographic reforms of 1996 and 2006 "dass" was written as "daß".
Aside: in some regions, "dass" would've been written like "dasz" / "daſz". That's why the letter is called Eszett (S-Z) even though it's capitalised as two consecutive "s".
To make the language easier to learn. Lots of languages go through orthographic reforms from time to time, English being one of the notable exceptions because there is no central authority that could impose rule changes in a way that would ensure that most language users eventually fall in line.
I entered school in Germany the very same year that the orthographic reform came into force, so I never learned the legacy spelling, but I certainly found it weird how much adult people at the time detested the rules that six-year-old me considered to be very reasonable (esp. the ss/ß reordering and the ban on fusing tripled consonants in compound words).
I know some conservative newspapers (Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung) kept using the old orthography for a while, but even they started using the new one in 2007, ten years after the reforms.
That is to say I also think it would be worthwhile to try.
reply