When your hash becomes a string: Hunting Ruby's million-to-one memory bug
1–10 of 70 posts
Re: When your hash becomes a string: Hunting Ruby's million-to-one memory bug
#2I don’t get it. Also it reads llmish
Re: When your hash becomes a string: Hunting Ruby's million-to-one memory bug
#3A little strange to write up a bug hunt that was resolved by the ffi upstream already, and not by the hunt itself. OP didn't fix the bug, though identifying that the upgrade was relevant is of some interest. Writing could have been clearer.
Re: When your hash becomes a string: Hunting Ruby's million-to-one memory bug
#4[flagged]
Re: When your hash becomes a string: Hunting Ruby's million-to-one memory bug
#5LLM slop. Why do people (presumably) take the time to debug something like this, do tests and go to great lengths, but are too lazy to do a little manual writeup? Maybe the hour saved makes up for being associated with publishing AI slop under your own name? Like there is no way the author would have written a text that reads more convoluted than what we have here.
Re: When your hash becomes a string: Hunting Ruby's million-to-one memory bug
#6LLM slop. Why do people (presumably) take the time to debug something like this, do tests and go to great lengths, but are too lazy to do a little manual writeup? Maybe the hour saved makes up for being associated with publishing AI slop under your own name? Like there is no way the author would have written a text that reads more convoluted than what we have here.
[flagged]
Re: When your hash becomes a string: Hunting Ruby's million-to-one memory bug
#7LLM slop. Why do people (presumably) take the time to debug something like this, do tests and go to great lengths, but are too lazy to do a little manual writeup? Maybe the hour saved makes up for being associated with publishing AI slop under your own name? Like there is no way the author would have written a text that reads more convoluted than what we have here.
I read it just fine and everything made sense in it.
I would spend similar time debugging this if I were the author. It's a pretty serious bug, a non obvious issue, and would be impossible to connect to the ffi fix unless you already knew the problem.
Re: When your hash becomes a string: Hunting Ruby's million-to-one memory bug
#8A little strange to write up a bug hunt that was resolved by the ffi upstream already, and not by the hunt itself. OP didn't fix the bug, though identifying that the upgrade was relevant is of some interest. Writing could have been clearer.
The bug that was fixed in upstream manifested differently than what he was experiencing so the journey was to validate it for his case.
OTOH I'm a bit surprised he didn't pull back earlier and suggest to his user to update to the latest version though and let him know.
Re: When your hash becomes a string: Hunting Ruby's million-to-one memory bug
#9LLM slop. Why do people (presumably) take the time to debug something like this, do tests and go to great lengths, but are too lazy to do a little manual writeup? Maybe the hour saved makes up for being associated with publishing AI slop under your own name? Like there is no way the author would have written a text that reads more convoluted than what we have here.
Sorry, why is this LLM slop? I only got about halfway through because I don’t care about this enough to finish the read, but I don’t see the “obvious LLM” signal you do.
Re: When your hash becomes a string: Hunting Ruby's million-to-one memory bug
#10LLM slop. Why do people (presumably) take the time to debug something like this, do tests and go to great lengths, but are too lazy to do a little manual writeup? Maybe the hour saved makes up for being associated with publishing AI slop under your own name? Like there is no way the author would have written a text that reads more convoluted than what we have here.
[flagged]
> which is par for Rubyists
Pro-tip: re-read your comment before you submit and take out the bits that make you sound like an asshole.