6 ms·
> The project owner strongly emphasize the no LLM dependency, in a world of AI slope this is so refreshing. The project owner is talking about LLVM,a compiler
by querez 7mo ago
> The project owner strongly emphasize the no LLM dependency, in a world of AI slope this is so refreshing.
The project owner is talking about LLVM,a compiler toolkit, not an LLM.
- kmaitreys 7mo agoIt's actually quite easy to spot if LLMs were used or not. Very few total number of commits, AI like documentation and code comments. But even if LLMs were used, the overall project does feel steered by a human, given some decisions like not using bloated build systems. If this actually works then that's great.
- butvacuum 7mo agoSince when is squashing noisesum commits an AI activity instead of good manners?
- kmaitreys 7mo agoCan you prove that this is what happened?
- sigmoid10 7mo agoThe first commit was 17k lines. So this was either developed without using version control or at least without using this gh repo. Either way I have to say certain sections do feel like they would have been prime targets for having an LLM write them. You could do all of this by hand in 2026, but you wouldn't have to. In fact it would probably take forever to do this by hand as a single dev. But then again there are people who spend 2000 hours building a cpu in minecraft, so why not. The result speaks for itself.
- saidnooneever 7mo agoa lot of ppl dont use git. and just chuck stuff in there willynilly when they want to share it. people are to keen to say something was produced with an LLM if they feel its something they cannot produce themselves readily..
- kmaitreys 7mo agoI would be very concerned about someone working on a 16k loc codebase without a VCS.
- embedding-shape 7mo ago> The first commit was 17k lines. So this was either developed without using version control or at least without using this gh repo. Most of my free-time projects are developed either by my shooting the shit with code on disk for a couple of months, until it's in a working state, then I make one first commit. Alternatively, I commit a bunch iteratively, but before making it public I fold it all into one commit, which would be the init. 20K lines in the initial commit is not that uncommon, depends a lot on the type of project though. I'm sure I'm not alone with this sort of workflow(s).
- kmaitreys 7mo agoCan you explain the philosophy behind this? Why do this, what is the advantage? Genuinely asking, as I'm not a programmer by profession. I commit often irrespective of the state of the code (it may not even compile). I understand git commit as a snapshot system. I don't expect each commit to be pristine, working version. Lot of people in this thread have argued for squashing but I don't see why one would do that for a personal project. In large scale open source or corporate projects I can imagine they would like to have clean commit histories but why for a personal project?
- embedding-shape 7mo ago> I don't expect each commit to be pristine, working version. I guess this is the difference, I expect the commit to represent a somewhat working version, at least when it's in upstream, locally it doesn't matter that much. > Why do this, what is the advantage? Cleaner I suppose. Doesn't make sense to have 10 commits whereas 9 are broken half-finished, and 10 is the only one that works, then I'd just rather have one larger commit. > they would like to have clean commit histories but why for a personal project? Not sure why it'd matter if it's personal, open source, corporate or anything else, I want my git log clean so I can do `git log --short` and actually understand what I'm seeing. If there is 4-5 commits with "WIP almost working" between each proper commit, then that's too much noise for me, personally. But this isn't something I'm dictating everyone to follow, just my personal preference after all.
- pheis 7mo agoOr first thousand commits were squashed. First public commit tells nothing about how this was developed. If I were to publish something that I have worked on my own for a long time, I would definitely squash all early commits into a single one just to be sure I don't accidentally leak something that I don't want to leak.
- kmaitreys 7mo agoLeak what?
- snovv_crash 7mo agoTimestamps
- ecshafer 7mo agoIf you have for example a personal API key or credentials that you are using for testing, you throw it in a config file or hard code it at some point. Then you remove them. If you don't clean you git history those secrets are now exposed.
- pheis 7mo ago>leak what For example when the commits were made. I would not like to share publicly for the whole world when I have worked with some project of mine. Commits themselves could also contain something that you don't want to share or commit messages. At least I approach stuff differently depending if I am sharing it with whole world, with myself or with people who I trust. Scrubbing git history when going from private to public should be seen totally normal.
- kmaitreys 7mo agoHmm I can see that. Some people are like that. I sometimes swear in my commit messages. For me it's quite funny to sometimes read my older commit messages. To each of their own. But my opinion on this is same as it is with other things that have become tell-tale signs of AI generated content. If something you used to do starts getting questioned as AI generated content, it's better to change that approach if you find it getting labelled as AI generated, offensive.
- ZaneHam 7mo agoHello not the poster but I am BarraCUDA's author. I didn't use GIT for this. This is just one of a dozen compiler projects sitting in my folder. Hence the one large initial commit. I was only posting on github to get feedback from r/compilers and friends I knew. The original test implementation of this for instance was written in OCaml before I landed on C being better for me.
- natvert 7mo agoSays the clawdbot
- kmaitreys 7mo agoIt's quite amusing the one time I did not make an anti-AI comment, I got called a clanker myself. I'm glad the mood here is shifting towards the right side.
- luckydata 7mo agothis type of project is the perfect project for an llm, llvm and cuda work as harnesses, easy to compare.
- kmaitreys 7mo agoWhat do you mean by harnesses?
- formerly_proven 7mo agoagentic ai harness for harness (ai)
- nurettin 7mo agoThey also said "hand written", implying that no LLMs whirred, slopped and moonwalked all over the project.
- jorvi 7mo agoI mean.. I'm one of the staunchest skeptics of LLMs as agents, but they're amazing as supercharged autocomplete and I don't see anything wrong with them in that role. There's a position between handwritten and slopped that's pareto.