• 0 Posts
  • 1.72K Comments
Joined 3 年前
cake
Cake day: 2023年6月21日

help-circle
  • By which I mean maybe the author enjoys different parts of coding than you do.

    It seems to me like the part of coding the author enjoys least is coding.

    Trying to wrangle AI into writing something decent is generally an exercise in frustration for me.

    This is my issue with it. The output of these tools, uhchecked, evolves into something abysmal over time. I find it quicker to just rewrite the output than to try to prompt it over and over again to produce something good.


  • Ok, first, copying and pasting a paragraph to quote from this website fucking sucks. I know it’s a site that gets cited a lot, so I feel terrible for all the people out there who have to deal with that.

    NVIDIA says developers can fine-tune the result with controls for intensity and color grading, allowing artists to adjust blending, contrast, saturation, and gamma to match a game’s visual style. The system also supports masking, so specific objects or image regions can be excluded from enhancement when developers want to preserve the original look or avoid changes in selected areas.

    They seem to at least be giving devs the ability to tune the output to their specific creative style. At least they’re addressing that, otherwise this would make no sense whatsoever because the output looks nothing like the input.

    On that note, as long as I can turn it off, I really couldn’t care less about this. I’ll be leaving it off. Even better if my GPU just doesn’t support this I guess.

    My biggest concern is if game devs are going to get lazier and start requiring this for their games to be playable. That’s basically what happened with framegen.



  • The high-level directory structure looks reasonable, but every language and build tool has its own recommended structure that people should use instead. For example, by default, cargo looks for a src/main.rs or src/lib.rs as an entrypoint. uv expects one of a couple different project structures before you need to touch the pyproject.toml. C# will create namespaces for each of these nested subdirectories if you don’t carefully configure it in your .csproj file. And so on.

    It’s best to just use whatever’s recommended for your environment by your tools. Maybe this directory structure works well for Guile Scheme, but I wouldn’t touch it at all if I were writing Rust.



  • I was able to turn the string into a char iterator, but I could not figure out how to change elements of said iterator (this can be seen at line 55).

    You have a few options here, but the easiest is to collect into a Vec<char>, replace the character there, then do a String::from_iter(chars) to get it back as a string.

    You can also manipulate the original chars iterator directly through takes, skips, and so on and collect it into a string, but that’s more complicated.

    Also, “character” is such a complicated concept because unicode is not simple. If you can work directly with bytes though, you can convert the string to a Vec<u8> (which is the underlying type for String), manipulate that directly, then do String::from_utf8 (or the same method for str) to convert it back to a string.


  • What happens when you import an library written in another language, and one of the functions is a reserved keyword in your language?

    This is already possible in Rust. You can import libraries written with different editions, and there are different reserved keywords across editions.

    The compiler just looks at what language the library was written in and switches internally based on that.

    In my C and C++ example, you’d pass different flags for that library during build time, although I’m not sure how this would work for header-only libraries.

    Edit: I see your reserved keywords example is an issue, and I raise you raw identifiers (r#if in Rust, @if in C#, etc)

    How would collaboration between people with different native languages work?

    Same way it currently does? It’s not like everyone who writes code knows English, but somehow they can all write it despite the keywords being in English.

    Who makes sure all language variant have equally good educational resources?

    The community around that programming language would be responsible for this, would it not? This is already a thing people do, though it’s impossible to translate all educational resources that exist into all languages. Fortunately we have services that can translate things for us though.

    There’s a reason why lingua francas change over time but always exist, and forgetting that will do more harm than good.

    It would do no harm here. People already write code in many languages. In most popular programming languages, you can already name things in Korean, French, Russian, and so on. Documentation for the languages exist already in all those languages. There is literally only one thing that would change: the keywords. It’s really not that complicated.


  • This might seem like an obvious question, but wouldn’t it be more effective for the README to be in Korean? Not that having it in English too is a bad thing, but people interested in a language with Korean keywords probably can read Korean more comfortably than English (if they can read English at all).

    Anyway, I don’t really see why PLs that support UTF-8 idents can’t just reserve multiple aliases in different languages for their keywords. Rust is mentioned here, so I’ll use that as an example, but Rust could just add a language field to Cargo.toml next to edition that defaults to English (which is what Rust currently uses), and that wouldn’t even need a new edition as far as I’m aware. C# could do a field in the csproj file, C and C++ can use compiler flags, and so on.



  • Adblocking is piracy, yet AMP, ChatGPT/AI overviews/etc, archival, and so on are perfectly okay, right? (Archival stands out here as being not a shitty thing to do but is still rehosting without serving paying ads)

    It’s only stealing when it inconveniences these creators. They seem perfectly content with what Google’s doing, though.

    Flipping it around, if the creators want more money, they need to solve that problem themselves. Charge money for some (or all) content if you need it. Sell merch. Find creative ways to showcase sponsored products that actually serve as valuable content. Being lazy and turning on ads or showing the same sponsor segment you’ve used dozens of times already isn’t going to do anything but annoy people.






  • I’m left wondering what the profession is turning into for other people.

    All the code I review looks good at first glance and makes shit up as it goes once you read into it more. We use two different HTTP libraries - one sync, one async - in our asynchronous codebase. There’s a directory full of unreadable, obsolete markdown files that are essentially used as state. Most of my coworkers don’t know what their own code does. The project barely works. There’s tons of dead code, including dead broken code. There are barely any tests. Some tests assert true with extra steps. Documentation is full of obsolete implementation details and pointers to files that no longer exist. The README has a list of all the files in the repo at the top of it for some reason.

    I will admit that I’m more in the naysayers camp, but perhaps that’s from a fear of losing my livelihood?

    People are being laid off because of poor management and a shitty economy. No software devs are losing their jobs because AI replaced them. CEOs are just lying about that because it’s convenient. If software devs truly were more effective with these tools, you’d hire more.

    Am I predisposed to see how these tools are lacking? Have I not given them a fair chance?

    That’s up to you to decide. Try using them if you want. But don’t force yourself to become obsessed with them. If you find yourself more productive, then that’s that. If not, then you don’t. It’s just a tool, albeit a fallible one.


  • people are often nasty when others ask questions they assume to be stupid.

    It sounds to me like you might want to reevaluate the communities you’re in. This sounds incredibly toxic.

    And I agree, for simple questions, it can be helpful. I would caution against overreliance on the answers though. Even the best models available today hallucinate regularly. Always verify answers when they are important.

    Also, learning to read documentation directly is a valuable skill to develop. Even if you don’t rely on the documentation directly, reading a lot of it will make it easier to write documentation as well.


  • I think the post (well, this translation anyway) is best read as a fantasy rather than associated with reality. It’s predicated on a lot of assumptions, including the assumption that AI has the ability to develop large software almost entirely autonomously, that large brands have no means to lock users within an ecosystem, that people will be able to articulate exactly the software they need and how it should be designed, and so on.

    The future being described by this post is the elimination of all roles of software and product development, spanning from developers to designers to even product managers.

    As a thought experiment, it’s interesting. It shouldn’t be confused as reality, though.




  • Is this even a surprise? Giving away free access to Copilot hemorrhages money and only exists to convert those users into paying customers. It costs them nothing to take away some features from these users.

    The only real ways to prevent this are local hosting (which is much more realistic these days) or an explicit contract stating that the features you want will remain for the duration of the contract. The latter is not an option with GH Copilot, as far as I’m aware, and is basically nonexistent with any modern services.