Seriously, "Learnings"? Learn you an English.
Learnings from 100K lines of Rust with AI (2025)
171–180 of 225 posts
Re: Learnings from 100K lines of Rust with AI (2025)
#172We're working on a large Rust codebase, heavily assisted development with Claude and Codex, and one critical workflow is after you have written a spec, have the other LLM critique it thoroughly. This back and forth will take quite a while, but the resulting implementation plan will be 10x better than the original. You can automate this by giving Codex a goal, and a skill to call Claude to review the implementation sp…
This is astrology for devs.
Do they have a golden calf to dance around? Without that success will be hit and miss.
Re: Learnings from 100K lines of Rust with AI (2025)
#173Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is uncharitable, but makes a prediction. I imagine you'd bet the author won't be successfully using this, at MS/Uber or wherever they are, in a year time? Rust makes no promise of being terser than C++, and RSL does less than this considering the optimization. Also it's only 45/50k LOC so not so very from the 36k LOC.
Yes, I would bet it won't go anywhere. The blog post mentioned the project is 130k LoC multiple times. Where 45/50k LoC comes from? >Rust makes no promise of being terser than C++ True, but Rust has no header files, this alone is a great LoC saver.
50k LOC wouled be the rust code without tests.
But it's not apples to apples because they seem to have done much more performance work though, this is far from code golfing.
Re: Learnings from 100K lines of Rust with AI (2025)
#174We MUST get programming languages and LLMs that do not ever change or break comments.
You can’t have contracts defined in comments in code because there’s no guarantee they won’t be deleted or changed.
Even better, we need the ability to embed directives to LLMs which are NOT comments, but a type of programming construct specifically for this purpose.
Re: Learnings from 100K lines of Rust with AI (2025)
#175We're working on a large Rust codebase, heavily assisted development with Claude and Codex, and one critical workflow is after you have written a spec, have the other LLM critique it thoroughly. This back and forth will take quite a while, but the resulting implementation plan will be 10x better than the original. You can automate this by giving Codex a goal, and a skill to call Claude to review the implementation sp…
This is astrology for devs.
as someone who is about as llm-forward as anyone out there, this is a brilliant analogy. was equally true of all the “prompt engineer” hype as well from a couple years ago (which i admit i still think does matter)… it kinda makes me feel like an audiophile / hi-fi person talking about how 24bit/192kHz is the one true encoding format and anything less is a willfull (cynical, “Quality”-hating, satisficerist, etc.) compromise. which i freely admit to being one of those people as well.
and in both cases i both “know” that i can tell the difference and “know that i cannot tell the difference”. what anyone takes from that in terms of what it says about me, personally, is a bit of a Rorschack test, but Astrology is about as apt a description as there is… xD
Re: Learnings from 100K lines of Rust with AI (2025)
#176Re: Learnings from 100K lines of Rust with AI (2025)
#177Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is astrology for devs.
Unless you can somehow provide some arguments against it, I feel like you're the one who is trying to cargo-cult stuff here. Say what you will with proper reasoning or arguments if you feel compelled, tired reddit-commentary like that helps no one.
i legitimately cannot divine what you are saying at all with this. there are so many dangling antecedents and modifiers that it is completely impossible. and i say this out of a genuine desire to understand what your argument is, knowing full well that i likely disagree with it.
Re: Learnings from 100K lines of Rust with AI (2025)
#178We're working on a large Rust codebase, heavily assisted development with Claude and Codex, and one critical workflow is after you have written a spec, have the other LLM critique it thoroughly. This back and forth will take quite a while, but the resulting implementation plan will be 10x better than the original. You can automate this by giving Codex a goal, and a skill to call Claude to review the implementation sp…
This is precisely how I used to use Beads before I made GuardRails (I wanted something slightly simpler, but similar with more 'guard rails'). I braindump everything I want to build, I ask Claude to do market level research. I then ask Claude to ask clarifying questions, when I ask Claude to be critical of its conclusions and provide the top options and to justify it. I also question Claude and say its okay to disagr…
oh man my body is ready for any post-beads ideas… i will definitely check this out
Re: Learnings from 100K lines of Rust with AI (2025)
#179Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you ask 10 different humans to produce the spec with the same information (prompt and context) they will also produce 10 unique answers that will contradict each other and (depending on who you asked) may be just as confident. There are real decisions to be made when going from a vague prompt to a spec. It's not surprising that an LLM would produce different specs for the same work on different runs. If the prompt…
LLMs aren't people. They don't reason. They're token generators, a black box. Your analogy falls on its face with any scrutiny.
why do people insist on claiming that they don’t reason, when they clearly, for all intents and purposes, do. you can be vague; you can express your idea a thousand different ways, and you will get a unique blend of x => semi-smoothed output. this is like some Searle Chinese Room bullshit that needs to just die. it is beyond clear that llms can interact with abstract concepts in an extremely meaningful way. this is like the “thought leader” version of the stupid-ass “it’s just smart autocomplete” argument. if you think that, it is user error— either a failure of creativity or a failure of perception or both. just because llms are not a panacea and are problematic for society and “overhyped” and whatever does not make it intellectually honest to claim that there is zero reasoning/creativity/cognition within the box.
Re: Learnings from 100K lines of Rust with AI (2025)
#180Earlier quoted context omitted.
LLMs aren't people. They don't reason. They're token generators, a black box. Your analogy falls on its face with any scrutiny.
Aren’t people pattern matching neural networks as well? Why does being a token generator mean something is unreliable? Further, why does that mean “it doesn’t reason”. Logic can be encoded in language, symbols or code. If I say “all apples are red” -> “all fruit in the bowl are apples” -> “therefor all the fruit are red”. It doesn’t really matter if I understand the logic or what red is or fruit/apples are, the logic…
no, brah, humans are TOTALLY different. just don’t think about it too hard. we are just special.