spion

14 ms·

1.
by spion 2mo ago
https://sandimetz.com/blog/2016/1/20/the-wrong-abstraction probably describes what happens with sufficient nuance
2.
by spion 2mo ago
sometimes you forsee the code developing vastly differently between the two copies so you don't want the refactor. it really all comes down to lack of online learning and contextual awareness; memento mori notes are about as effective
3.
by spion 3mo ago
Use composer 2.5 fast in cursor (or cursor cli). YMMW but I find it fast enough to maintain focus on one task (if that's what you're going for given a particular problem
4.
by spion 7mo ago
A summary of the session should be part of the commit message.
5.
by spion 7mo ago
Why aren't we using HATEOAS as a way to expose data and actions to agents?
6.
by spion 8mo ago
cold take speculation: the architecture astronautics of the Java era probably destroyed a lot of the desire for better abstractions and thinking over copy-pasting, minimalism and open standards hot take speculation: we base a lot of our wor
7.
by spion 8mo ago
Has anyone measured whether doing things with AI leads to any learning? One way to do this is to measure whether subsequent related tasks have improvements in time-to-functional-results with and without AI, as % improvement. Additionally tw
8.
by spion 9mo ago
Great article. Really advances the thinking on error handling. Rust already has a head start compared to most other languages with Result, expect and anyhow (well, color_eyre and tracing), but there was indeed a missing piece tying together
9.
by spion 9mo ago
IMO you need both things: culture to make it happen, and technology to make it easy and reasonable looking. Rust lacks the former to some degree; Go lacks the later to some degree (see e.g. kustomize error formatting - everything ends up on
10.
by spion 9mo ago
I don't think there is anything in Go (the language) that helps achieve this - its mostly cultural. (Go creators and community being very outspoken about handling errors). In fact, the easiest thing to do in Go is to ignore the error;
11.
by spion 11mo ago
I wonder if it would've felt more natural if the "part 2s" of the puzzles became separate days instead. (Still 12 days worth of puzzles, but spread out across 24 days, with maybe one extra, smaller, easier puzzle for the last
12.
by spion 1y ago
pnpm just added minimum age for dependencies https://pnpm.io/blog/releases/10.16#new-setting-for-delayed-...
13.
by spion 1y ago
I don't think thats contrary to the article's claim: the current tools are so bad and tedious to use for repetitive work that AI is helpful with a huge amount of it.
14.
by spion 1y ago
Its not settled whether AI training is fair use.
15.
by spion 1y ago
No, it still doesn't work. But the only way to realise it is to actually really try using it.
16.
by spion 1y ago
Try actually doing it, realise how very far the outcome is from what the blog posts describe the vast majority of the time, and get dread from the state of (social) media instead.
17.
by spion 1y ago
I think agents have a curve where they're kinda bad at bootstrapping a project, very good if used in a small-to-medium-sized existing project and then it goes downhill from there as size increases, slowly. Something about a brand-new p
18.
by spion 1y ago
There are a few languages where this is not too tedious (although other things tend to be a bit more tedious than needed in those) The main problem with these is how do you actually get the verification needed when data comes in from outsid
19.
by spion 1y ago
The OP is the author of grugbrain.dev
20.
by spion 1y ago
Indeed. Which is why I think the only way to really evaluate the progress of LLMs is to curate your own personal set of example failures that you don't share with anyone else and only use it via APIs that provide some sort of no-data-r
21.
by spion 1y ago
What you think is an absurd question may not be as absurd as it seems, given the trillions of tokens of data on the internet, including its darkest corners. In my experience, its better to simply try using LLMs in areas where they don'
22.
by spion 1y ago
Its hard to say. Historically new discoveries in AI often generated great excitement and high expectations, followed by some progress, then stalling, disillusionment and AI winter. Maybe this time it will be different. Either way what was a
23.
by spion 1y ago
Vibe-wise, it seems like progress is slowing down and recent models aren't substantially better than their predecessors. But it would be interesting to take a well-trusted benchmark and plot max_performance_until_date(foreach month). (
24.
by spion 1y ago
Why dagger and not just... any language? (Nushell for example https://www.nushell.sh/ )
25.
by spion 1y ago
You could potentially use the module system to bring protocol implementations into scope. This could finally solve the monkey-patching problem. But its a fairly novel idea, TC39 are risk-averse, browser-side are feature-averse and the langu
26.
by spion 1y ago
This is why TC39 needs to work on fundamental language features like protocols. In Rust, you can define a new trait and impl it for existing types. This still has flaws (orphan rule prevents issues but causes bloat) but it would definitely
27.
by spion 1y ago
How are async closures / closure types, especially WRT future pinning?
28.
by spion 1y ago
I'm an incredibly happy user of nushell, which brings all the best features of other shells terse pipelining syntax and all the best features of more well designed scripting languages (functions, modules, lexical scope, data structures
29.
by spion 2y ago
Google doesn't really say it can't find an answer; instead it finds less relevant (irrelevant) search results. LLMs hallucinate, while search engines display irrelevance.
30.
by spion 2y ago
Indeed, cognitive load is not the only thing that matters. Non-cognitive toil is also a problem and often enough it doesn't get sufficient attention even when things get really bad. We do need better code review tools though. We also n

More ›