6 ms·

> That simply isn’t possible without an LLM. Do you have a lot of experience with minified code?

rafram 2y ago
Yes, I do. Please link to a tool that can infer function/variable names and TypeScript type definitions from minified JS without using LLMs or requiring significant user input.
- mpalmer 2y ago
  You didn't say it's impossible for a tool to do it. You said it's impossible. Also, it's guessing at the names, guessing at type definitions, and it makes further guesses based on its previous ones, correct or no. If you don't already know what you're doing, you're in trouble. For someone to claim that they're sharing the "decompiled" source of Claude Code for the public good is self-important back-patting nonsense, let alone misleading.
  - rafram 2y ago
    [flagged]
    - mpalmer 2y ago
      OP is an adult who published his writing and posted it here himself for feedback. It's not all going to be positive. > I get the sense that you’re frustrated that something you’ve invested a lot of time and energy into learning is being automated. Maybe you’re scared because the technology has moved so quickly and your understanding of how to use it hasn’t kept up Wrong on all counts. I use LLMs to write code all the time, and I know how they work, which is why I find processing 5MB of JS through one to be an obscene waste of energy. I do not use LLMs to publicly claim abilities I don't already have myself. Reading this article does not worry me one bit about my job security.
    - throw10920 2y ago
      > I get the sense that you’re frustrated that something you’ve invested a lot of time and energy into learning is being automated. Maybe you’re scared because the technology has moved so quickly and your understanding of how to use it hasn’t kept up. This is profiling/projection. You're incapable of responding to the GP's points so you're instead emotionally lashing out and attacking them. This is not really suitable for HN. > But making someone’s day worse on Hacker News isn’t a good way to deal with that. This suggests that you're incapable of distinguishing criticism of someone's work with personal attacks on them (furthered by the profiling that you tried to conduct above). Those things are not the same. If your day is ruined by someone posting reasonable criticism of an article that you personally submitted to HN, a place explicitly designed for intellectual curiosity, your expectations need to be adjusted.
      - rafram 2y ago
        I did respond to GP’s points. And I didn’t say “day is ruined.” I’m also not OP.
        throw10920 2y ago
        > I did respond to GP’s points. And you also profiled and personally attacked them. > I didn’t say “day is ruined.” > making someone’s day worse on Hacker News Now you're continuing to be dishonest. For the purposes of this discussion, those are the same thing. > I’m also not OP. Reading my comment will show that I never said you were nor are any of the points I made predicated on that.

Yes, I do. Please link to a tool that can infer function/variable names and TypeScript type definitions from minified JS without using LLMs or requiring significant user input.

mpalmer 2y ago
You didn't say it's impossible for a tool to do it. You said it's impossible. Also, it's guessing at the names, guessing at type definitions, and it makes further guesses based on its previous ones, correct or no. If you don't already know what you're doing, you're in trouble. For someone to claim that they're sharing the "decompiled" source of Claude Code for the public good is self-important back-patting nonsense, let alone misleading.
- rafram 2y ago
  [flagged]
  - mpalmer 2y ago
    OP is an adult who published his writing and posted it here himself for feedback. It's not all going to be positive. > I get the sense that you’re frustrated that something you’ve invested a lot of time and energy into learning is being automated. Maybe you’re scared because the technology has moved so quickly and your understanding of how to use it hasn’t kept up Wrong on all counts. I use LLMs to write code all the time, and I know how they work, which is why I find processing 5MB of JS through one to be an obscene waste of energy. I do not use LLMs to publicly claim abilities I don't already have myself. Reading this article does not worry me one bit about my job security.
  - throw10920 2y ago
    > I get the sense that you’re frustrated that something you’ve invested a lot of time and energy into learning is being automated. Maybe you’re scared because the technology has moved so quickly and your understanding of how to use it hasn’t kept up. This is profiling/projection. You're incapable of responding to the GP's points so you're instead emotionally lashing out and attacking them. This is not really suitable for HN. > But making someone’s day worse on Hacker News isn’t a good way to deal with that. This suggests that you're incapable of distinguishing criticism of someone's work with personal attacks on them (furthered by the profiling that you tried to conduct above). Those things are not the same. If your day is ruined by someone posting reasonable criticism of an article that you personally submitted to HN, a place explicitly designed for intellectual curiosity, your expectations need to be adjusted.
    - rafram 2y ago
      I did respond to GP’s points. And I didn’t say “day is ruined.” I’m also not OP.
      - throw10920 2y ago
        > I did respond to GP’s points. And you also profiled and personally attacked them. > I didn’t say “day is ruined.” > making someone’s day worse on Hacker News Now you're continuing to be dishonest. For the purposes of this discussion, those are the same thing. > I’m also not OP. Reading my comment will show that I never said you were nor are any of the points I made predicated on that.