4 ms·
The current level of insanity with AI is off the charts. Porting to a safe language without the safety features.
by mariopt 4mo ago
The current level of insanity with AI is off the charts.
Porting to a safe language without the safety features.
- Supermancho 4mo agoPorting is usually a messy process. Do you know it's less safe than the Zig version? Maybe it's just highlighting where the problems already existed. Regardless, wild hyperbole are not constructive.
- sumeno 4mo agoNobody knows if it is less safe than the Zig version because nobody has ever read the code. Maintainers included
- Supermancho 4mo agoIronically, suggesting that 13k is ridiculous compared to an unknown (the zig version is available for assessment) is as compelling as any other vibes.
- dgellow 4mo agoAs a human I would likely port it the same way. First a translation close to 1:1 from the source, then redesign/refactor areas little by little to match the target language idioms
- anthk 4mo agoIn some cases it's impossible. C to TCL almost fine, C mapped to Scheme, or Prolog, hell awaits, because Scheme's functions can reduce tons of redundant functions to a single one.
- dgellow 4mo agoSure, but that doesn’t really apply to zig => rust
- hoppp 4mo agoSo don't port. Write a better version.
- charcircuit 4mo agoC2Rust, the most popular transpiler from C to Rust will leave a bunch of unsafe blocks. After the initial port it is expected for the authors to go in and work to remove them.
- deleted 4mo ago[deleted]
- vrmiguel 4mo agoBut if that's the goal then I _think_ the "port" is perfectly achievable without LLMs. Zig transpiles to C, then C2Rust would do the rest
- charcircuit 4mo agoThere's more than one way to crack an egg.