71–80 of 122 posts
Why do this? Ruff already exists.
They don't all support the same rules (there's literally thousands of them), so it's quite common to run multiple linters against a project.
I run Ruff + a type checker.
No human needs to read or write Rust anymore.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
hopefully I never have to work with you if you think 2 seconds for libting is fine
and hopefully I never have to work with you if you think that every single second must be spent coding, no seconds allowed for stuff to process in the background when you save a file
Of course I'm not sure I'd trust to install or use in my main machine something that has been 100% written by an LLM, that doesn't have enough reviews and scrutiny, but the numbers look astounding: codebase pylint prylint speedup black 26.7 hr 41s 2328×
It's still impressive but it looks like a pathological case in a test directory.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Essentially pay-to-win for coding.
With moves like this, I'm not so sure victory is assured... but yes. Pay to play. I, like most, beat linting delay by running it in the background; asynchronous. Having been negative, so far, I want to say something positive. I appreciate that LLMs weren't used for license washing in this case.
If you rewrite someone's stack ... you take out the design part of the work. No need to redesign. Obviously the high level decisions work. 99.5% work as well in python as they do in rust ...
Of course, this will never be the next big thing, and just doesn't help companies one iota. If you need a new thing, this will fuck up badly. Hell, even this translation will fuck up without a senior developer regularly telling the model: "WTF!!!!! Don't do that. Just don't". For a new product you need 100x that.
Fully agentic coding is working well for projects like this since no matter how you write the code, the only way to truly know "it's working" is if it passes the test.
With the right skills you can make well designed software with agentic coding too. It's not as easy as a simple "convert this to rust" prompt, at least today.
IMHO there is little point of these conversion projects. It screams of "look at me, see what I made" and when the attention goes down a little nothing was ever pushed to the repo ever again. Perhaps I am out of touch, but a project with author/s that have passion for every line, function and purpose, feels more real and worth my trust to spend time using it.
They said it's a median 85x speedup while maintaining byte for byte equivalence. If it wasn't agentic coding that got there, everyone would be singing praises about that.
IMHO there is little point of these conversion projects. It screams of "look at me, see what I made" and when the attention goes down a little nothing was ever pushed to the repo ever again. Perhaps I am out of touch, but a project with author/s that have passion for every line, function and purpose, feels more real and worth my trust to spend time using it.
Making something 50-2000x faster is pointless? Besides that, Rust code is actually much easier to maintain , thanks to type system guarantees.
Usually those inflated numbers come from single-thread to multi-thread comparisons, where you can fudge as much as you want by adding more cores. They claim this is a single-core to single-core comparison, so basically that means they had a heinous performance bug hidden in their code, almost certainly an n^2 behavior. If this is true 2000x is not the limit of what they could have claimed as speedup. Why not 10,000x? Why not 10,000,000x? All are equally true, and none of them could be fixed by a faithful port of the codebase from one language to another.
So I kinda read it as them being confidently, arrogantly stupid, waving around a result without seemingly having thought about what it means. I think it means they could get most of the speed without ever having had to leave Python if they just fixed one bug...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In this case, it’s maybe more “I can access that luxurious model you all pleb are banned from using”
Eh, I'm not that interested in participating in the marketing. I don't believe Fable/Mythos-lite/whatever is needed to translate. Or, as you call it, luxurious. Fair point, though. Agreed in principle.