2 ms·
Yeah I've been collecting some of the weirdest ones I've seen floating by. It's really the only thing that has me visiting linkedin. https://www.marginalia.nu
by marginalia_nu 8mo ago
Yeah I've been collecting some of the weirdest ones I've seen floating by. It's really the only thing that has me visiting linkedin.
https://www.marginalia.nu/junk/linked/games.jpeg https://www.marginalia.nu/junk/linked/games.jpeg
https://www.marginalia.nu/junk/linked/json.png https://www.marginalia.nu/junk/linked/json.png
https://www.marginalia.nu/junk/linked/syntax.png https://www.marginalia.nu/junk/linked/syntax.png
(and before anyone tells me to charge my phone, I have one of those construction worker phones with 2 weeks battery. 14% is like good for a couple of days)
- girvo 8mo agoThose are so funny that I was forgetting to breathe as I was laughing so hard, man that's excellent haha. Thanks for sharing them, even if we are cooked as a society...
- g947o 8mo agoCare to explain the last one? The presentation is weird and stupid, but I don't see any obvious (technical) issue other than the missing bracket on the left, unlike the first two
- carlob 8mo agoThe 'long' code for checking apples is shorter, but it's missing the external for loop. So I guess you could say it's not (ahem) an apples to apples comparison.
- donkey_brains 8mo agoNo “for” loop in the example purportedly showing an iterative approach. Not mentioning the pain of debugging the streaming solution is also a little disingenuous.
- raphman 8mo agoI'm not OP but: - missing ")" on the left side - extra "}" on the right side - the apples example on the right side ("Short code") ist significantly longer than the equivalent "Long code" example on the left side (which might also be because that code example omits the necessary for loop). - The headings don't provide structure. "Checking Each Apple" and "Only Red Apples!" sounds like opposites, but the code does more or less the same in both cases.
- marginalia_nu 8mo agoIterative example doesn't iterate, mismatches parentheses and brackets. Because of this, the iterative example is shorter and simpler than the "short & simple" lambda example. Lambda example is to the best of my parsing ability this: apples.stream() .filter(a -λ a.isRed()); // <-- note semicolon .forEach(giveApple); Should be apples.stream() .filter(a -> a.isRed()) // or Apple::isRed .forEach(a -> giveApple(a)); // or this::giveApple It's also somewhat implied that lambdas are faster, when they're generally about twice as slow as the same code written without lambdas.
- OskarS 8mo agoIt's interesting to see how LLMs make mistakes sometimes: replacing `->` with `-λ` because arrow sort-of has the same meaning as lambdas in lambda calculus. It's like an LLM brain fart replacing something semantically similar but nonsensical in context.
- marginalia_nu 8mo agoProbably morphed > into λ because they're similar shapes, and lambda was in the prompt. Image models are often prone to that sort of hallucination.
- gzread 8mo agoThe red apple streams one is good. It shows how developers chase shiny new stuff with no respect for fundamentals. They will say it's less code, and then show you more code.
- BalinKing 8mo agoThe apples one is LLM nonsense: the left example doesn’t include any code for the loop, whereas the streams version actually is iterating over a collection. Regardless, FP-style code isn’t “shiny new stuff”—it’s been around for decades in languages like Lisp or Haskell. Functional programming is just as theoretically “fundamental” as imperative programming. (Not to mention that, these days, not even C corresponds that closely to what’s actually going on in hardware.)
- ckcheng 8mo ago>> apples.stream() >> .filter (a -} ajsRed()); >> .forEach(giveApple); [sic] > The red apple streams one is good. It shows how developers chase shiny new stuff with no respect for fundamentals. The problem isn’t streams, it’s slop.
- epiccoleman 8mo agoMinecraft JAVA --------> C++ that one gave me an actual lol.