This is the dram. Since the entire codebase is shit, you basically have to rewrite it basically in its entirety.

Which means you can do it with an actual good design.

And if you mess up on something, you have a working version you can consult.

It’s not one thing or the other.

For example I often end up using event loops. Where an event is a tagged union. Some events take up 1 byte, some 400. It’s almost effortless to put the big variants in the heap, and just keep a pointer in the union. So why not do it from the start.

Sure, optimizing every loop to make it vectorizable is probably not worth it, since that loop you wrote on the 10th commit might not even exist when the software is released. But there are many low hanging fruit.

Also, some optimizations require a very specific software architecture. Turning all your arrays of structs into structs of arrays may be a pain if you didn’t plan for making that switch.

If what you want is low level, I recommend wgpu. And you can go even lower level of you go for wgpu-core instead.

However, when you go this low level, making a game is not the objective, since it would be incredibly tedious compared to using an actual game engine. I had a lot of fun doing small things with wgpu though. Learned a lot too.

I don’t understand why any user would have to care or even know what GUI toolkit an app uses.

I don’t know why the burden is put on the user/DE. You shouldn’t have to care about what GUI toolkit your DE uses either.

DE and themes should be decoupled from eachother. So the user can install whatever “theming system” they want, and GUI toolkits should aim to support as many theming systems as practical.

GUI toolkits are implementation details, the user doesn’t care about implementation, it cares about what it sees. And what it sees is the colors and icons.

In my opinion, this question makes no sense so it belongs nowhere.

But for it to be on topic, it would need to go in a general technology or OS community.

Data storage devices are the last items you wanna buy second hand though. A drive failing could mean much more than just having to buy a new one.

I hope this is satire. But I can’t be certain if it is.

No it is not. This has nothing to do with programming.

Programming is writing in a programming language so the computer can execute it.

This post mentions no programming language, nor any set of programming languages. It isn’t either something that applies to all languages.

In short, it has nothing to do with programming

Don’t read too much into it. Sound like he just doesn’t want trump to miss the rest of the speech.

The problem is not the AI integration. Along with AI integration they changed their stance on data selling.

It went from “We promise to never sell your data” to “Firefox is secure!” Just as they were adding AI.

The same argument for cartels. “We didn’t all increase our prices to the exact same amount, we just paid a consulting company to tell us which price we should use. Of course our competitors used the exact same company, but that’s just a coincidence”.

Tbf that leads to the problem of:

Company/Individual makes program that is in no way meant for making management decision.

Someone else comes and deploys that program to make management decisions.

The ones that made that program couldn’t stop the ones that deployed it from deploying it.

Even if the maker aimed to make a decision-making program, and marketed it as so. Whoever deployed it is ultimately the responsible for it. As long as the maker doesn’t fake tests or certifications of course, I’m sure that would violate many laws.

Heh. Ironic.

Gen AI porn and shitposts are the only 2 decent use cases I’ve seen of gen AI.

You can’t make half of those without training it on porn.

Maybe they changed the defaults. I stopped using GitHub after they trained their AI over private repos.

But I remember clearly that I was annoyed when looking at my own repos because my forks (for actually doing PRs) would show at the top instead of my own repos.

Maybe some people don’t delete the fork after their PR is done.

In my case, I found another explanation.

Sometimes, a random person comes and forks one of my repos. I check their profile, and it’s a techbro student with hundreds of forked repos without any commits. With their bio referencing AI or some shit.

I’m pretty sure these people fork a lot of repos just to pad their CV or something. Make it look like you have a lot of repos. Because when you go to someone’s profile, it is not clear that a repo is a fork instead of their own creation.

Maybe naming single-letter variables I can see being easier to review than to do.

Any other kind of refactoring though, IDE refactoring tools are instantaneous and deterministic.

The problem with that is that reviewing takes time. Valuable maintainer time.

Curl faced this issue. Hundreds of AI slop “security vulnerabilities” were submitted to curl. Since they are security vulnerabilities, they can’t just ignore them, they had to read every one of them, only to find out they weren’t real. Wasting a bunch of time.

Most of the slop was basically people typing into chatgpt “find me a security vulnerability of a project that has a bounty for finding one” and just copy-pasting whatever it said in a bug report.

With simple MRs at least you can just ignore the AI ones an priorize the human ones if you don’t have enough time. But that will just lead to AI slop not being marked as such in order to skip the low-prio AI queue.

I hope they are prepare for the AI slop DDoS. Curl wasn’t, and they didn’t even state they would welcome AI contributions.

There are use cases. Like containers where the pointer to the object itself is the key (for example a set). But they are niche and should be implemented by the standard library anyway. One of the things I hate most about Java is .equals() on strings. 99.999% of times you compare strings, you want to compare the contents, yet there is a reserved operator to do the wrong comparison.