Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | k3vinw's commentslogin

https://sharktastica.co.uk/image?id=yysMQjg1

Admiring the keyboard layout they went with. I love that Ctrl is placed in my preferred location. That’s prime real estate that modern keyboards waste on Capslock. Unfortunately, Capslock still exists awkwardly adjacent to the space bar.


That cord storage pocket is pretty nice as well.

Should have called it Bunz!


I appreciate the perspective, but code reviews are subjective. The tooling and the language can be so good that it shifts to this kind of utopian state, where all bugs are caught and eliminated by guarantees in the language and tooling. Or they could be dismal to the point a human needs to check for mundane issues like bugs in the code.


> Nice idea but I don't understand why people write bash scripts more than a few lines long.

From a pragmatic perspective I agree. But I think you’re missing the point here. A lot of the most entertaining, and dare I say inspiring content, found on Hacker News is about exactly things like this. Things that seem silly, but are also very intentionally pushing the boundaries to the extreme/absurd.


Awesome! I’m the author and I created that project as a way to teach myself Bash at the time. I called it NanoBlogger because it was inspired by MicroBlogger, yet another Bash blog.

I still have fond memories of the open source community’s warm welcome and amazing contributions to the project.


Oh, that's amazing. Thank you so much. I still love the aesthetic of both using bash and the default template!


like declarative vs imperative?


> We can stop reading LLM-generated code just like we don’t read assembly, or bytecode, or transpiled JavaScript; our high-level language source would now be another form of machine code

This is too weird for me. At least with programming languages I can consult the documentation and if the programming language isn’t behaving as documented, it’s obviously a defect and if you’re savvy enough you often have open channels that accept contributions. Can we say the same for Claude or other AI solutions?


If you run a local LLM and an open source agent harness you are pretty close to that.


can you explain how? with a compiler you can rely on the adage "it's never a compiler bug" (until it is! and then you can fix it)

how can a local LLM with an open source agent harness provide the same trustworthiness?


> ... then you can fix it

I recall working on a project that used (MSVC) VC++ and a coworker found a bug in the compiler. We reported the issue to Microsoft and they eventually patched it.

You may find yourself arguing explicitly for open source dev tools if you continue down this line. There are many commercial cases where "you can fix it" does not apply to the dev toolchain and you will find yourself reliant on a provider. At that point, the trustworthiness of "compiler provider" and "local LLM provider" is the pertinent discussion (e.g. provider vs. provider instead of LLM vs compiler).


> There are many commercial cases where "you can fix it" does not apply to the dev toolchain and you will find yourself reliant on a provider.

That’s only on the hobbyist level. On the enterprise level, there are lots of contracts involved that requires speedy bugs correction.


> You may find yourself arguing explicitly for open source dev tools

well sure, of course i would :) but ig i meant more so "can be fixed" in a way it can't with llms, open source or not


Never occurred to me how much ms dos batch syntax must have been inspired by basic when I saw the comments (aka remarks) start with “rem”


I’m not so sure. I had a recent experience where Kiro was convinced there was a defect in the testing library when I asked it to refactor some existing project code.

However this conclusion made no sense as we had similar scenarios across our project that worked flawlessly. After intervening I determined the root cause was a combination of an async issue with the production code and some incorrect mocking that was covering up the async issue.

It never occurred to the AI agent to do some simple cross examination before essentially throwing in the towel?


I think uncle bob meant you are not going to type the code anymore, not that you stop coding.

I would argue your example is exactly the reason why you need to supervise AI


Fair point. I’m still learning how best to take advantage of Ai. And to be honest, a statically typed language would have caught the issue with the wrong return type before the AI tool.


Gives me a whole new perspective to the phrase clean code.


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: