4 ms·

Do the people in this corner use compilers? Would they agree that programmers who don't use them* have been replaced by those that do? *: I'm aware of cases li

by NiloCK 1y ago

Do the people in this corner use compilers? Would they agree that programmers who don't use them* have been replaced by those that do? *: I'm aware of cases like the recent ffmpg assembly usage that gave a big performance boost. When talking about industrial trend lines, I'm OK with admitting 0.001% exceptions. (Apologies if it comes across as snarky or pat, but I honestly think the comparison is reasonable.)

tzumaoli 1y ago
When Fortran came out, I don't think a lot of people yelled at the assembly programmers and told them "learn Fortran or be replaced".
- pklausler 1y ago
  If the assembly programmers were struggling with correctly optimizing loops for optimal performance on several distinct target machines, I would hope that their management would want them to try this new Fortran thing and see how well it worked. (And it did, and it enabled new companies like CDC to win customers from IBM.)
wat10000 1y ago
There are technologies that become de facto requirements for work in a field. For software, compilers and version control both qualify. But... what else? These things are rare. It’s not like there’s a new thing that comes along every few years and we all have to jump on or be left behind, and LLMs are the latest. There’s definitely a new thing that comes along every few years and people say we have to jump on or be left behind, but it almost never bears out. Many of those ended up being useful, but not essential. I see no indication that LLMs or associated tooling are going to be like compilers and version control where you pretty much can’t find anyone making a living in the field without them. I can see them being like IDEs or debuggers or linters where they can be handy but plenty of people do fine without them.
bee_rider 1y ago
Compilers were invented pretty early on in things… I wouldn’t be they shocked if the population of assembly programmers has remained constant. Where would you put the peak? Fortran was invented in the 50’s. The total population of programmers was tiny back then…
diabllicseagull 1y ago
this is kind of a funny example to me because of all the programming language and compiler discourse that's happening. analogies almost always miss the mark by hiding the nuances that need discussing, and this topic is no exception.
nottorp 1y ago
> Do the people in this corner use compilers? Would they agree that programmers who don't use them* have been replaced by those that do? Are you aware compilers are deterministic most of the time? If a compiler had a 10% chance of erasing your code instead of generating an executable you'd see more people still using assembly.
jennyholzer 1y ago
the comparison is preposterous.
conartist6 1y ago
Compilers are systems that tame complexity in the "grug-brain" sense. They're true extensions of our senses and the information they offer should be provably correct. The basic nature of my job is to maintain the tallest tower of complexity I can without it falling over, so I need to take complexity and find ways to confine it to places where I have some way of knowing that it can't hurt me. LLMs just don't do that. A leaky abstraction is just a layer of indirection, while a true abstraction (like a properly implemented high-level language) is among the most valuable things in CS. Programming is theory-building!

by NiloCK 1y ago

tzumaoli 1y ago

When Fortran came out, I don't think a lot of people yelled at the assembly programmers and told them "learn Fortran or be replaced".

pklausler 1y ago
If the assembly programmers were struggling with correctly optimizing loops for optimal performance on several distinct target machines, I would hope that their management would want them to try this new Fortran thing and see how well it worked. (And it did, and it enabled new companies like CDC to win customers from IBM.)

wat10000 1y ago

There are technologies that become de facto requirements for work in a field. For software, compilers and version control both qualify. But... what else? These things are rare. It’s not like there’s a new thing that comes along every few years and we all have to jump on or be left behind, and LLMs are the latest. There’s definitely a new thing that comes along every few years and people say we have to jump on or be left behind, but it almost never bears out. Many of those ended up being useful, but not essential. I see no indication that LLMs or associated tooling are going to be like compilers and version control where you pretty much can’t find anyone making a living in the field without them. I can see them being like IDEs or debuggers or linters where they can be handy but plenty of people do fine without them.

bee_rider 1y ago

Compilers were invented pretty early on in things… I wouldn’t be they shocked if the population of assembly programmers has remained constant. Where would you put the peak? Fortran was invented in the 50’s. The total population of programmers was tiny back then…

diabllicseagull 1y ago

this is kind of a funny example to me because of all the programming language and compiler discourse that's happening. analogies almost always miss the mark by hiding the nuances that need discussing, and this topic is no exception.

nottorp 1y ago

> Do the people in this corner use compilers? Would they agree that programmers who don't use them* have been replaced by those that do? Are you aware compilers are deterministic most of the time? If a compiler had a 10% chance of erasing your code instead of generating an executable you'd see more people still using assembly.

jennyholzer 1y ago

the comparison is preposterous.

conartist6 1y ago

Compilers are systems that tame complexity in the "grug-brain" sense. They're true extensions of our senses and the information they offer should be provably correct. The basic nature of my job is to maintain the tallest tower of complexity I can without it falling over, so I need to take complexity and find ways to confine it to places where I have some way of knowing that it can't hurt me. LLMs just don't do that. A leaky abstraction is just a layer of indirection, while a true abstraction (like a properly implemented high-level language) is among the most valuable things in CS. Programming is theory-building!