3 ms·

It's a total tangent but AI being so good at developing rust means that my first impression of seeing a rust project has totally changed. 4 or 5 years ago if I

by dwedge 2mo ago

It's a total tangent but AI being so good at developing rust means that my first impression of seeing a rust project has totally changed. 4 or 5 years ago if I had to weigh up two options and one was written in rust it was almost a sure thing that the program was snappy, fast, reliable and that the author was competant. Now it's a sure fire sign that the project was probably vibe coded. Not saying it can't still be good, I just have a different first impression now

Animats 2mo ago
> Now it's a sure fire sign that the project was probably vibe coded. Groan. That's sad.
- jason_oster 2mo ago
  Compare to what happened to Python. That will cheer you up!
  - jaggederest 2mo ago
    Hey, at least python is now extremely consistent: it's an unpleasant tarpit regardless of whether it's human or AI generated. Ruby, too, rip my native programming language. I remember in the pre-AI era I was doing a quick sample contract employment with a company that had >200 columns in their user table and was manually enumerating them in every query, multiple times. They were using SELECT $1,$2,...$184,$185 from tablename with an enormous list of columns referenced only by offset. That's not python's fault, but I've weirdly seen it more often in python codebases.
    - Animats 2mo ago
      That's a different tarpit. That's the problem with object-relation mapping, which is trying to deal with the mismatch between structs in languages and rows in SQL. There are a huge number of such schemes, and they range from somewhat annoying to awful. They're bad across a broad range of programming languages. This is an area where LLMs might actually help. Or make things worse. We'll have to see.
      - jaggederest 2mo ago
        I think the difference I see is with things like Prisma, where there's a type system to lean on and proper nomenclature, or Rails which, despite all the magic, more or less maps columns straightforwardly based on the labels instead of having to $123 and later in the file ensure that $123 is what you think.

by dwedge 2mo ago

Animats 2mo ago

> Now it's a sure fire sign that the project was probably vibe coded. Groan. That's sad.

jason_oster 2mo ago
Compare to what happened to Python. That will cheer you up!
- jaggederest 2mo ago
  Hey, at least python is now extremely consistent: it's an unpleasant tarpit regardless of whether it's human or AI generated. Ruby, too, rip my native programming language. I remember in the pre-AI era I was doing a quick sample contract employment with a company that had >200 columns in their user table and was manually enumerating them in every query, multiple times. They were using SELECT $1,$2,...$184,$185 from tablename with an enormous list of columns referenced only by offset. That's not python's fault, but I've weirdly seen it more often in python codebases.
  - Animats 2mo ago
    That's a different tarpit. That's the problem with object-relation mapping, which is trying to deal with the mismatch between structs in languages and rows in SQL. There are a huge number of such schemes, and they range from somewhat annoying to awful. They're bad across a broad range of programming languages. This is an area where LLMs might actually help. Or make things worse. We'll have to see.
    - jaggederest 2mo ago
      I think the difference I see is with things like Prisma, where there's a type system to lean on and proper nomenclature, or Rails which, despite all the magic, more or less maps columns straightforwardly based on the labels instead of having to $123 and later in the file ensure that $123 is what you think.