naasking

25 ms·

421.
by naasking 10mo ago
What are the legal or other ramifications of people misrepresenting the goals of your project? What is it you're worried about exactly?
422.
by naasking 10mo ago
Almost nobody proves their code works. At best, they simply have high confidence it works. This confidence is also sometimes (often?) misplaced.
423.
by naasking 10mo ago
Agree to disagree then! I've done plenty of CIL reading and writing. It's fine, but not what I'd call pleasant, not even compared to C.
424.
by naasking 10mo ago
I'm assessing my own experience here. I occasionally check new models on some kinds of problems I'm familiar with but that are not common programming challenges, like arrow-based FRP abstractions but written in C# rather than Hask
425.
by naasking 10mo ago
> I don't think that these specific tools are here to stay. I agree, we're still in an experimental phase so these tools are definitely not in their final form, I meant more that the LLM core of the tool is here to stay, and fa
426.
by naasking 10mo ago
> Also, the FOMO argument for why one should use X as much as they can Who said that you should use it as much as you can? > Though the person you originally got this from may have been! Borderline offensive to claim that I could only
427.
by naasking 10mo ago
> At no point compilers produced stochastic output. [...] Most important of all, it completely removed the need for the developer to meddle with that output. Yes, once the optimizations became sophisticated enough and reliable enough tha
428.
by naasking 10mo ago
There is, Datastar has client-side rendering based on signals [1]. Datastar is also very explicitly designed to be modular and extensible, so you can extend the client-side with more features, as they've done with Web Components. [1]
429.
by naasking 10mo ago
It is true that htmx requires some straddling backend and frontend. I think the organizational approaches that split them is dumb to begin with personally. Good UI/UX almost always impacts the backend.
430.
by naasking 10mo ago
> I don't believe you'd lose any 'productivity' compared to e.g. C, assuming equal amounts of experience. I'm skeptical, but do you think that you'd see no productivity gains for Python, Java or Haskell?
431.
by naasking 10mo ago
> If you find it compiled something wrong, you can walk backwards through the code, if you want to find out what it'll do walk forwards. LLMs have no such capability. Right, so you agree that optimization outputs not fully predictab
432.
by naasking 10mo ago
Just extrapolating a trend of the past few years. If you disagree, then carry on and time will tell.
433.
by naasking 10mo ago
Did the models from 2 years ago produce more bugs, fewer bugs or the same bugs as today's models? Do you think next years AI models will produce the same number of bugs, more bugs, or fewer bugs?
434.
by naasking 10mo ago
> Yes, because: Unless you wrote the compiler, you are 100% full of it. Even as the compiler writer you'd be wrong sometimes. > Deterministic complexity =/= randomness. LLMs are also deterministically complex, not random.
435.
by naasking 10mo ago
> Assembly experts still write code that runs faster than code produced by compilers. They sometimes can , but this is no longer a guaranteed outcome. Supercompilation optimizers can often put manual assembly to shame. > Impact of ha
436.
by naasking 10mo ago
Are you able to predict with 100% accuracy when a loop will successfully unroll, or various interprocedural or intraprocedural analyses will succeed? They are applied deterministically inside a compiler, but often based on heuristics, and t
437.
by naasking 10mo ago
> No because programmers aren't the ones pushing the wares, it's business magnates and sales people. This is not correct, plenty of programmers are seeing value in these systems and use them regularly. I'm not really sure
438.
by naasking 10mo ago
A tractor based on a Model T wouldn't have been very compelling either at the time. Not many horse-drawn plows these days though.
439.
by naasking 10mo ago
> When an API returns JSON, your JS framework can decide what to do with it. The JS framework is the frontend, so you're still coordinating. > If its returning HTML that's intended to go in a particular place on a page, the
440.
by naasking 10mo ago
Look into DataStar and Alpine Ajax then, they're much smaller and more targeted.
441.
by naasking 10mo ago
Successful compiler optimizations are probabilistic though, from the programmer's point of view. LLMs are internally deterministic too.
442.
by naasking 10mo ago
> Frontend and backend must agree on every scenario When is this not the case?
443.
by naasking 10mo ago
> That's like saying my C# is getting turned into CLR bytecode, so I do have to learn CLR bytecode because I have an abstraction over it. That's not a valid analogy, 99.99% of C# developers never see or touch CLR bytecode, wher
444.
by naasking 10mo ago
I didn't find it too hyperbolic, I think they were very clear on where htmx can help, eg. the section "you're not building Google docs".
445.
by naasking 10mo ago
Exactly. I'm sure assembly language programmers from the 1980s could easily write code that ran 2x faster than the code produced by compilers of the time, but compilers only got better and eventually assembly language programming becam
446.
by naasking 10mo ago
Our industry never exhibited an abundance of caution, but if you have trouble understanding the value of AI here, consider that you are akin to an assembly language programmer in the 1970s or 80s who couldn't understand why people are
447.
by naasking 10mo ago
It's totally plausible that AI codegen produces more bugs. It still seems important to familiarize yourself with these tools now though, because that bug count is only ever going to go down . These tools are here to stay.
448.
by naasking 10mo ago
I think most existing declarative languages still require the programmer to specify too many details to get something usable. For instance, Prolog often requires the use of 'cut' to get reasonable performance for some problems.
449.
by naasking 10mo ago
I think at this point it's reasonable to conclude that quotemstr does not have a legitimate concern until a program demonstrating the issue can be presented.
450.
by naasking 10mo ago
> What I mean is the risk of hitting the limit of number of available counter bits. I think this is vanishingly unlikely in a system like EROS/CapROS. As I said, revocations in such a system are very rare, and the version number is

More ›