Earlier quoted context omitted.
"/loop maintain it" in a cron job
/loop make people respect me for being competent and trustworthy
missing the point
Fable Converted Pylint to Rust
91–100 of 122 posts
Re: Fable Converted Pylint to Rust
#92Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
Yeah a fun hobby of mine this week is to take all these "amazing" Fable projects and clone them with DeepSeek Flash (not even Pro)
Nice, same here/there. Still haven't tried DS, all Gemma, GPT-'OSS', and Qwen.
Re: Fable Converted Pylint to Rust
#93It's fascinating to read the comments here. The attitude is very strange to me. Writing software is not a sport that if you "cheat" using tools then your results are worthless. Results are speaking for themselves. Unless you can provide a failing test case that the software presented here fails at then your arguments for "how" it was made is moot. Fully agentic coding is working well for projects like this since no m…
It's not fascinating, it's tired and well trod territory. I'm disappointed that the HN community fell so willingly into the same hole drawing professionals fell into when Photoshop was released.
Re: Fable Converted Pylint to Rust
#94Considering how successful LLMs are at these kinds of projects. I think labs RL on converting successively bigger programs from language A to B, considering they have near-infinite training data, and infinite retries, I think given enough compute, LLMs can get very good at this.
Which implies that eventually one can set 'A' to English and 'B' to x86 assembly. Which means LLMS will eventually emit executable code. Whether this will be a party trick or a meaningful shift in software, remains to be seen.
Perhaps for some LLMS, there will need to be some intermediate translation, but this will disappear over time.
Re: Fable Converted Pylint to Rust
#95Earlier quoted context omitted.
You can't get 2000x faster without actually eliminating some large percentage of the work, you just cannot. You have to find some way to get rid of 99.95% of the work you were doing. 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 ha…
In the world of compilers there is a lot of wasted compute. In my project I'm also getting good results (for now on single files) https://tsz.dev/benchmarks/micro
Your best result is not even an order of magnitude faster, while this repo is claiming on average almost 2 orders of magnitude faster. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence sort of thing.
Re: Fable Converted Pylint to Rust
#96I think open source is dead. Basic issue is - if your product is open source or even open core, building a business around it would be impossible because someone else would point an AI agent at it and would have similar thing to offer.
Hence, closed source is what's next probably. Unfortunately.
Re: Fable Converted Pylint to Rust
#97IMHO 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.
>type system guarantees
Can't they run Pylint on itself?
Re: Fable Converted Pylint to Rust
#98IMHO 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.
Ah, that reminded me to check up on these "AI wonder projects". Cursor's Web Browser? Last update 5 months ago: https://github.com/wilsonzlin/fastrender The Claude C compiler? 4 months since any changes: https://github.com/anthropics/claudes-c-compiler Zero moderation too, nice. https://github.com/anthropics/claudes-c-compiler/issues/264#... CloudFlare's slop NextJS project is still going though. https://github.com/c…
Serverless Matrix workers seems to be going nowhere as well.
Re: Fable Converted Pylint to Rust
#99Earlier quoted context omitted.
Making something 50-2000x faster is pointless? Besides that, Rust code is actually much easier to maintain , thanks to type system guarantees.
You can't get 2000x faster without actually eliminating some large percentage of the work, you just cannot. You have to find some way to get rid of 99.95% of the work you were doing. 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 ha…
>You can't get 2000x faster without actually eliminating some large percentage of the work
Yeah, exactly. That's how optimization works! Recognizing that in many cases, the work is that was being done is not necessary to produce the result you actually need, that it could have been in a different way.
This can sometimes involve adding complexity (by means of a better data structure or algorithm, e.g. a quadtree), and sometimes involve removing it (non-pessimization[0]).
That being said, it's certainly also possible to achieve a speedup by breaking things, which you are suggesting is the case here. I can't comment on that part.
[0] Casey Muratori - Refterm Lecture Part 1 - Philosophies of Optimization https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pgoetgxecw8
Re: Fable Converted Pylint to Rust
#100Do you generally pylint an entire codebase at once though? Why not just the file you are actually working on? Based on the homeassistant results (10.3 hours to lint 17.5k files), it only takes about 2 seconds to pylint a file, which doesn't really feel like enough of a wait to need an entirely new linter
2 seconds is bonkers to check a single file.
Ha. I'm probably in the more anti AI camp, but if it could free us from the plague that is Python thinking, I might change my tune. 2 seconds might feel negligible in the real world, but it is damn near an eternity in the supercomputers we're all running.