Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Pnpm 12.0

pnpm.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 72 posts

Re: Pnpm 12.0

#31

Post by serbuvlad »

zarzavat wrote: post #22
magnio wrote: post #7

The more I read these ass Claude Opus writings the more I believe AGI is further away from us.

I thought 'how bad can it be?', yet only three paragraphs in "a specifier now names a repository rather than choosing a transport" If you're going to serve us slop then at least serve us good slop, give it a pass through GPT 5.6 to clean up the English.

I remember the most interesting things to do with 3.5 Turbo was to ask it to rewrite paragraphs in different styles.

Why can modern LLMs basically not do that anymore? They each have their own very particular writing style?

It it all just beaten out of them in post training?

Re: Pnpm 12.0

#32

Post by deanc »

fredrikholm wrote: post #29
deanc wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe the author is a non-native English speaker, and this enables him to communicate things he's not able to do himself. Should OSS maintainers start hiring professional translators? Are you going to fund that? We really should stop jumping to conclusions and shaming people for using these tools just because you don't like the language of the LLM. How is a non native speaker meant to determine what is English slop a…

This is a recent degradation; they've been writing blog entries for years. As a non native English speaker I can also attest to this trade being extremely demanding of English fluency: > public static void DoTheThing(Configuration config) Isn't something you can not understand and still function as a software engineer. Yes, some schools and universities teach in other languages, but the entire ecosystem from code to…

It doesn't matter. I work with people who aren't native speakers (in a country where English-education is a very high standard) but are mostly fluent in day to day conversation and meetings and they are not comfortable writing long-form texts - and it shows. Your expectations are unrealistic.

Re: Pnpm 12.0

#33

Post by IanCal »

zarzavat wrote: post #22
magnio wrote: post #7

The more I read these ass Claude Opus writings the more I believe AGI is further away from us.

I thought 'how bad can it be?', yet only three paragraphs in "a specifier now names a repository rather than choosing a transport" If you're going to serve us slop then at least serve us good slop, give it a pass through GPT 5.6 to clean up the English.

What’s the problem with that? Seems to make sense to me with the example and it’s important to point out. I’d expect an llm to explain in more detail to be honest.

Re: Pnpm 12.0

#34

Post by IanCal »

I’m going to write a filter to remove comments that are just bitching about whether something is AI written or not. Seeing “slop” now starts to give me m$ vibes

Re: Pnpm 12.0

#35

Post by raincole »

deanc wrote: post #25
zarzavat wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I thought 'how bad can it be?', yet only three paragraphs in "a specifier now names a repository rather than choosing a transport" If you're going to serve us slop then at least serve us good slop, give it a pass through GPT 5.6 to clean up the English.

Maybe the author is a non-native English speaker, and this enables him to communicate things he's not able to do himself. Should OSS maintainers start hiring professional translators? Are you going to fund that? We really should stop jumping to conclusions and shaming people for using these tools just because you don't like the language of the LLM. How is a non native speaker meant to determine what is English slop a…

> Should OSS maintainers start hiring professional translators?

The world existed before 2022.

Re: Pnpm 12.0

#36

Post by janylim9 »

raincole wrote: post #35
deanc wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe the author is a non-native English speaker, and this enables him to communicate things he's not able to do himself. Should OSS maintainers start hiring professional translators? Are you going to fund that? We really should stop jumping to conclusions and shaming people for using these tools just because you don't like the language of the LLM. How is a non native speaker meant to determine what is English slop a…

> Should OSS maintainers start hiring professional translators? The world existed before 2022.

[flagged]

Re: Pnpm 12.0

#37

Post by anon7000 »

IanCal wrote: post #33
zarzavat wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I thought 'how bad can it be?', yet only three paragraphs in "a specifier now names a repository rather than choosing a transport" If you're going to serve us slop then at least serve us good slop, give it a pass through GPT 5.6 to clean up the English.

What’s the problem with that? Seems to make sense to me with the example and it’s important to point out. I’d expect an llm to explain in more detail to be honest.

It doesn’t quite make sense at face value by itself. It’s too condensed and takes some effort to parse out what it’s actually getting at. It’s not communicating why the change was made. It’s just a shiny way of saying the words without actually helping me easily understand what’s happening, what’s changing, why, etc.

In plain English, maybe it’d be more like “Package specifiers for git repositories should no longer include the HTTPS/SSH protocol. Instead, reference the repository name, and pnpm will resolve it through HTTPS. If SSH is still needed, add an override in your global git settings”

Re: Pnpm 12.0

#38

Post by CraigJPerry »

norman784 wrote: post #19

I got to the conclusion that boring is good enough, for me NPM is the best tool, is not that fast, but the installation speed is not that bad, considering how many times I need to run from scratch, the difference does not matter, it is stable and it's the default Node package manager, so I don't need to bother to install in CI any other tool, etc. My experience for long living projects is to stick with the defaults,…

Describing NPM as boring is a stretch. Given its security model, i think spicy is a far more apt label.

I have switched to pnpm already.

Re: Pnpm 12.0

#39

Post by apt-apt-apt-apt »

1matin wrote: post #15

Whenever you see a lot of long dashes (—) in a writing, there's a high chance Claude has written it.

Perhaps – but it's a useful grammatical construct in everyday use, handy for structuring sentences.

And with the prevalence of AI, it rubs off on the smelly humans, who also find it useful and use it more as a result. (I used an en dash here instead of an em one – also valid, easier to type, and shorter).

Re: Pnpm 12.0

#40

Post by netniuq »

anon7000 wrote: post #37
IanCal wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What’s the problem with that? Seems to make sense to me with the example and it’s important to point out. I’d expect an llm to explain in more detail to be honest.

It doesn’t quite make sense at face value by itself. It’s too condensed and takes some effort to parse out what it’s actually getting at. It’s not communicating why the change was made. It’s just a shiny way of saying the words without actually helping me easily understand what’s happening, what’s changing, why, etc. In plain English, maybe it’d be more like “Package specifiers for git repositories should no longer i…

yes! and this is sooo weird given that Opus 4.8 or 5 producing this are supposed to be "smart" models – how far into the benchmaxxing do you have to lean to get to this point?
Post reply on HN