3 ms·

If you skimmed the article and missed the subtle notes, the author deliberately chose the wrong way to use the Rust version to make a point. Even ChatGPT told h

If you skimmed the article and missed the subtle notes, the author deliberately chose the wrong way to use the Rust version to make a point. Even ChatGPT told him it was wrong for his use case: > As mentioned, the other way to use the Rust version has the same behaviour as the Haskell/Lean/etc versions. ChatGPT did actually point out to me that this way was better, and the other way (the one I used) was adequate only if the input was limited to ASCII.

dfee 1y ago
Yes, there was vibe coding throughout. Should've probably been an article about how vibe coding results in incorrect software.
- Aurornis 1y ago
  It’s more than that. ChatGPT actually gave the right answer but they chose not to use it to make a point.
  - tracker1 1y ago
    Not quite right... as there would still be 3 failures in the tests, like Haskel. Realistically, I would expect to have a couple different methods available... one that split a string into groups of code segments that represent a single unit, and a display width of units (0-2). Alternatively another method that just counted the display width in numbers of character spaces (assuming mono-spacing). Then you could apply the padding more naturally. The grouping of characters would be more for other tests for display beyond left padding.
    - IshKebab 1y ago
      They were definitely trying to make Rust look worse than it is. They even sarcastically acknowledge that: > I didn’t deliberately pick the one which made Rust look even worse than all the others, out of peevish resentment for every time someone has rewritten some Python code (my go-to language) in Rust and made it a million times faster – that’s a ridiculous suggestion. And > Rust, as expected, gets nul points. What can I say?
    - tracker1 1y ago
      Found it... Counting display width[1], getting unicode segments[2]. 1. https://crates.io/crates/unicode-display-width 2. https://crates.io/crates/unicode-segmentation
  - whbrown 1y ago
    To be fair, you'd have to also import this crate to get the result he wanted: https://docs.rs/unicode-segmentation/latest/unicode_segmentation/ https://docs.rs/unicode-segmentation/latest/unicode_segmenta...

dfee 1y ago

Yes, there was vibe coding throughout. Should've probably been an article about how vibe coding results in incorrect software.

Aurornis 1y ago
It’s more than that. ChatGPT actually gave the right answer but they chose not to use it to make a point.
- tracker1 1y ago
  Not quite right... as there would still be 3 failures in the tests, like Haskel. Realistically, I would expect to have a couple different methods available... one that split a string into groups of code segments that represent a single unit, and a display width of units (0-2). Alternatively another method that just counted the display width in numbers of character spaces (assuming mono-spacing). Then you could apply the padding more naturally. The grouping of characters would be more for other tests for display beyond left padding.
  - IshKebab 1y ago
    They were definitely trying to make Rust look worse than it is. They even sarcastically acknowledge that: > I didn’t deliberately pick the one which made Rust look even worse than all the others, out of peevish resentment for every time someone has rewritten some Python code (my go-to language) in Rust and made it a million times faster – that’s a ridiculous suggestion. And > Rust, as expected, gets nul points. What can I say?
  - tracker1 1y ago
    Found it... Counting display width[1], getting unicode segments[2]. 1. https://crates.io/crates/unicode-display-width 2. https://crates.io/crates/unicode-segmentation
- whbrown 1y ago
  To be fair, you'd have to also import this crate to get the result he wanted: https://docs.rs/unicode-segmentation/latest/unicode_segmentation/ https://docs.rs/unicode-segmentation/latest/unicode_segmenta...