Live data from Hacker News

Microsoft denies rewriting Windows 11 in Rust using AI

windowslatest.com

1–10 of 113 posts

Re: Microsoft denies rewriting Windows 11 in Rust using AI

#4
> Our North Star is "1 engineer, 1 month, 1 million lines of code"

Can someone explain this? Are they suggesting that (eventually) one engineer can produce 1 million lines of Rust code in a month? Or replace 1 million lines of C code?

Using new "powerful code processing infrastructure"... but would it understand the semantics? Are those semantics clearly documented?

Re: Microsoft denies rewriting Windows 11 in Rust using AI

#6

The simple fact that they have to deny it, meaning such an absurd is widely considered plausible, is already a sign of their reputation.

Too bad they aren't Google and announced in on April fool's and get to claim that it was just a joke if it turns out it didn't land well.

Re: Microsoft denies rewriting Windows 11 in Rust using AI

#8
I am sure why people are so terminally online to care about this. Like Rust for Linux is also here to stay and we can expect that in 10-20y a large portion of the kernel will be in Rust. Obviously the post was boasting, it was meant as a recruitment ad. They actually probably got a few decent candidates from it.

Re: Microsoft denies rewriting Windows 11 in Rust using AI

#9
post #5

The original LinkedIn post is pretty wild. I wonder if he did a fat line of coke before writing that, or if it actually were any concrete plans that have been worked out.

>is pretty wild

How is it wild? On social media I kept seeing things like people falsely expecting the end goal would require manually reading through a million lines of code. It seemed more like people making up reasons to be mad or trying to dunk on the author.

Re: Microsoft denies rewriting Windows 11 in Rust using AI

#10
post #5

The original LinkedIn post is pretty wild. I wonder if he did a fat line of coke before writing that, or if it actually were any concrete plans that have been worked out.

>is pretty wild How is it wild? On social media I kept seeing things like people falsely expecting the end goal would require manually reading through a million lines of code. It seemed more like people making up reasons to be mad or trying to dunk on the author.

My read was rewriting one million lines of code per engineer month using ML to do the heavy lifting.

Which is absolutely batshit. There's no way that can be reviewed properly, even if it's putting all of the review work on all of the other teams.

Post reply on HN