lmm

36 ms·

751.
by lmm 1y ago
> Part of the benefit over a dependency is that the code added will (hopefully) be narrowly tailored to your specific need, rather than the generic implementation from a library that likely has support for unused features. In decent ecos
752.
by lmm 1y ago
Yes, exactly. It's tragic that the only way programming culture ever improves is when a language comes out that's better for writing software in and happens to also have bigger numbers on microbenchmarks.
753.
by lmm 1y ago
> Classic type classes can only contain functions not types... > Now if Rust did not have such language features maybe it would have implemented iterators very differently. Current Rust iterators are similar to Java iterators, and in
754.
by lmm 1y ago
> One of Rust’s biggest and best features is its trait system inspired by Haskell’s type classes. It is the right abstraction for most use cases that in 1990 were implemented by OOP and inheritance. Now the basics of type classes were in
755.
by lmm 1y ago
If you're in the habit of using words to mean the opposite of what most people usually use them to mean, it's not surprising that you find yourself in semantic arguments often.
756.
by lmm 1y ago
> If plain open-source local models were able to do what Claude API does, Anthropic would be out of business. Not necessarily. Oracle has made billions selling a database that's less good than plain open-source ones, for example.
757.
by lmm 1y ago
> taking/viewing photos Camera and screen quality are often what the new generation of a phone is sold on. For everything else, yeah if you're not watching videos or gaming then you probably don't need a top-end model.
758.
by lmm 1y ago
> Could we have made Rust in 1990? We did, it was called OCaml. If we'd had any sense we'd've rewritten all our systems code in it. But since C had bigger numbers on microbenchmarks, no-one cared.
759.
by lmm 1y ago
> The GenAI tooling is allowing me to do things that I otherwise wouldn't have time to do, which objectively to me is a clear win. So, I'm going to look at a study like that and pick it apart, because it doesn't match my
760.
by lmm 1y ago
> However, this part of AI evolves very quickly. So given these are known problems, why shouldn't we expect rapid improvements in agentic AI systems for software development, to the point where software developers who stick with the
761.
by lmm 1y ago
> So for instance to make antibiotic-free chicken without a commitment to being antibiotic-free and organic, raise a bunch of chickens, take any who gets sick enough to need antibiotics and put them into a separate field with their antib
762.
by lmm 1y ago
It's got a very long time to do so. Like how a bowl of water evaporates at room temperature.
763.
by lmm 1y ago
If you look at the actual document it's 1¾ miles, which seems to have been incorrectly OCRed or copy-pasted.
764.
by lmm 1y ago
> And it's never really asynchronous. It's more honest to block everyone who might have input. How? Even if you decide you need everyone to look at it, letting everyone check it off asynchronously is more respectful of people&#
765.
by lmm 1y ago
> Wang was born into a family whose parents got Chinese government scholarships to study abroad but secretly stayed in the US, and then the guy turns super anti-China. All I'm hearing is he's a smart guy from a smart family?
766.
by lmm 1y ago
Maybe. I'm not going to shoot for your moved goalposts until you at least show the thing you claimed was "easy... to cite" first
767.
by lmm 1y ago
Cases that are both memory corruption and UB tell us nothing about one being worse than the other. My initial claim in this thread was "the worst case of UB is worse than the worst case of most kinds of non-UB memory safety issues&quot
768.
by lmm 1y ago
> It would be easy for me to cite some worst-case memory corruption vulnerabilities with real world consequences. Could you do that for a couple of non-UB ones then? That'll make things a lot more concrete. As far as I can remember
769.
by lmm 1y ago
> You seem to be setting a high bar (AI success stories don't ring true), while taking the study as fact. This feels like a cognitive bias. I think it's interesting that you jump to that. I consider a study, even a small one, t
770.
by lmm 1y ago
> Can I ask you to be specific here? The worse memory corruption vulnerabilities enable trivial remote code execution and full and surreptitious reliable takeovers of victim machines. What's a non-memory-corruption UB that has a wor
771.
by lmm 1y ago
> That sounds like an ad-hoc planning for a single issue, which you could also just do for a subset of the open issues, every, lets say, 2 weeks. So you'd require the whole team to spend time on matters that interested only a subset
772.
by lmm 1y ago
Essentially Descartes' evil demon, since there are no limits at all on what UB can do.
773.
by lmm 1y ago
> This is clearly nonsense. It is indeed. Unfortunately it's also the C language standard.
774.
by lmm 1y ago
> There is no European alternative that is any safer How do you figure that? If you're worried about your privacy in the UK, keeping your data in a Five Eyes country cloud provider is a very bad idea, arguably even worse than keepin
775.
by lmm 1y ago
> But there is also evidence that AI is actually getting things done, right? Is there? I haven't seen a single AI success story that rang true, that wasn't coming from someone with a massive financial interest in it being succe
776.
by lmm 1y ago
> In other words, Rust has solved the halting problem since the static checking of array bounds is undecidable in the general case! Pfft, the simply typed lambda calculus solved the halting problem back in 1940.
777.
by lmm 1y ago
> Doesn't null-pointer-dereference always crash the application? No. It's undefined behaviour, it may do anything or nothing. > Is it only an undefined-behavior because program-must-crash is not the explicitly required by th
778.
by lmm 1y ago
> UB is in fact not worse than a memory safety issue The worst case of UB is worse than the worst case of most kinds of non-UB memory safety issues. > NULL pointer dereferences are almost never exploitable Disagree; we've seen en
779.
by lmm 1y ago
> Everything you say about memory safety issues applies to logic bugs too. It doesn't, because logic bugs generally have, or can be made to have limited scope. > And likewise in reverse - you can have a memory safety issue that d
780.
by lmm 1y ago
> Imagine Sutter wrote a C compiler, and someone found a way to crash it. But the only way to reproduce that crash is via code that invokes undefined behavior. why would Herb prioritize fixing that over other work? Because submitting cod

More ›