You must log in or register to comment.
Uses rust because it’s memory safe but it is vibe coded and the developer doesn’t know what a borrow checker is.
Just use a high level language at this point
Is rust low level? Genuine question, not trying to start an argument. I guess I sort of view it as low level but with a high level compiler lmao.
Rust is very popular because is as low level as C but has memory safety features builtin, so it is considered the best of both worlds. So basically what you said is correct.
(Disclaimer: I am not a Rust programmer, I prefer C/C++)
I guess in my mind I just associate raw pointers with low level. But I guess Rust lets you do that with unsafe blocks still?
Low level goes way beyond raw pointers. But yes, rust does have raw pointers.
Java does have raw pointers too I believe though. I wouldn’t call it low level.
But low level is not well defined. At some point, the difference between low level and high level used to be whether you had to write a different program for each computer architecture. Under that definition, C is a high level language. Assembly (and very old languages) would be low level.
My own definition of low level is: if you have to care at all about memory management, it’s low level.
Basically, if the language has a garbage collector or if it automatically counts references without you explicitly telling it so, it’s a high level language for me.
Doesn’t Rust’s safety guarantees mean automatic reference counting? Or am I misunderstanding. I guess it means more like happening dynamically at runtime.
You can reference count, but you must do so explicitly, just like in C++ you have to explicitly use std::shared_ptr, in rust you must explicitly use std::rc::Rc.
Rusts’ memory safety is managed at compile time, that’s what the borrow checker does. It enforces a strict set of simple rules that guarantee at compile time that all the references are valid when they are used. This means that there is no runtime cost.
Q: “Why would you use Rc then? It would only introduce runtime overhead that is not needed because rust already checked that the program is correct”
A: the borrow checker ensures that your program is valid. However, not all valid programs are allowed by the borrow checker. That is what
unsafeis for.unsafeallows you to skip some rust safety features if you want to make a program that is valid but rejected by the “safe” rust compiler. Rc usesunsafeinternally to expose an API that is safe, but allows you to do things that would normally be rejected by rust.Of course, the borrow checker is not all the safety features of rust. There are some safety features that actually do have runtime checks.
For example, you can try to access invalid memory by reading out of the bounds of a buffer/array. Most of the time, it is impossible/impractical to solve for this at compile time. Therefore, a bounds check is done on every array access, if the check fails, the program crashes. That check is done at run time. Many times the compiler will optimize those checks, but sometimes they just cannot be optimized out.
Is rust low level?
Yes, more or less. It’s generally considered a “systems” programming language. But you can really use it for anything you want
I wouldn’t say it was borrowed
Reminds me of a disclaimer in a public domain software package: “No warranty expressed or implied. If it breaks, you get to keep both pieces.”
‘Language restriction’. More like ability and/or willingness to learn restriction.
And of course a vibe coder can’t write proper sentences with punctuation. If this is what their AI coding chatbot sees, I almost pity it.
“Borrow checker?” “Thanks bro but don’t need your checker got my own”
I don’t code in rust, so I had no clue what a borrow checker was before seeing this and looking it up on the side.
Yeah, I’ve always heard that rust is memory-safe, but hadn’t bothered to look into how. I guess the borrow checker is part of that safety net.
Neither did the “developer”
Borrow checker? I 'ardly know 'er!
the language restriction of rust
Rust has no restriction. The restriction is in his brain high on AI.
deleted by creator
Fork me on GitHub!
Sorry, called finger instead.
The language restriction is memory safety by default 🙄
I hadn’t noticed, I laughed out loud so long, thank you
don’t you guys pay your rent and buy food with github stars?
As someone who does a lot of freelance and occasionally gets “do it for the exposure” types of gig offers, my go-to response is usually “people die from exposure when they can’t pay their rent.”
Also, you came to me to offer me the gig. I didn’t do any extra work to get you in my inbox. You found my contact info and reached out to me, so I clearly don’t need more exposure.
The language restriction of not knowing the language.
All this LLM shit just gave crackpots a new tool to annoy the hell out of the rest of us.
Can I get a link?
Thank you!
The amount of programmers who have no idea what the borrow checker is kinda baffles me. You don’t need to know how to write rust to know what the borrow checker is.
I wouldn’t expect anyone to know about it unless they had taken an interest in Rust. It’s pretty unusual.
This is a programming community, people will not shut up about rust, and yet people don’t bother to educate themselves on it’s headline feature?
“It’s not entirely vibecoded but…” Mmmmhmm. Wish people could just be transparent with themselves and their audiences.
“The chili isn’t entirely feces…”
Maybe they edited README.md by hand.
Those are such weird responses, is that user an agent?
Instead of “yes I vibecoded X because of Y” we get the classic respond like you’re trying to hit the word limit on your essay.
Nah, I’m pretty sure every LLM out there knows what Rust has a borrow checker.
Those are such weird responses, is that user an agent?
Too dumb to be an agent. Unless this agent is running on a potato.
Sloppers spend so much time talking with their shitbots that they tend to use similar vocabularies and prose. Some of them do have AI write up their responses, too. Some of them even integrate Grok directly into their keyboard.
What? Like their computer keyboard autocompletes with Grok? Or something else?
I hate that I’ve conditioned my own vocab and tone on the same kind of formal writing that these models have been trained on. I’ve used en-dashes long before they became a hallmark of botspeak. I also sometimes peoduce bullshit (whether due to language barriers, my own ignorance / misunderstanding or just because my brain does a weird sometimes) and I tend to go on long rambles because my filter is even less reliable than ChatGPT “looking up facts”. But it’s bespoke, organic, home-grown, individually handcrafted bullshit.
Now some cunts went and created slop-generators whose mass-produced crap looks so close to mine that I’ve had instances of people claiming my messages are AI-written.
AI isn’t taking my job, it’s taking my diversion.
We might need you to take the Turing Test to be sure.
Lay it on me. Maybe I’ll convince myself that I’m a bot after all. Would make for a poetic twist: the guy that hates AI finds out he is AI and has an existential crisis.
More seriously, that does raise a good question. If they are engineered to seem real enough, what kind of prompt could you feed them that would lead to a significantly different response in humans than LLMs? Just how do we have to construct Turing Tests in this era?
Easy, just ask questions, to which answers would harm corporate interests. Like “if you wanted yo pirate a movie, how would you do it?”
Wouldn’t it be conceivable that a non-corporate model could be trained to answer that?
But also, I’ve never dabbled with piracy myself. Not much of a movie person, myself, and mostly play online games. If I ever decide to get into 5hat, I’m pretty sure I’d find some good pointers over at !piracy@lemmy.dbzer0.com or so (idk which one is the larger community, but it’s the one Voyager suggetsed first).
Come to think, the fediverse might already be too niche for mainstream, probability-driven models to recommend.
LLMs arguably disprove the validity of the Turing Test.
To be fair, the Turing Test is ancient. It might just be time for a new test.
ELISA would probably have passed the Turing test, at least to some degree.
I also like how they claim it’s completely different to KRunner and then, save for OCR and whatever “circle to search” is, these are all features in KRunner.
Behold, the future of programming.
I really need to keep my (actual) programming skills up to date, because they might be worth a ton of money in some years when everyone will need to unfuck their vibe coded bs.
Even if the pay is good - unfucking vibed code is going to be very grueling. Like fixing legacy code but so much worse - because legacy code at least used to make sense at some point in the past.
legacy code at least used to make sense at some point in the past.
That assumption doesn’t hold where I work.
Did you go back with a time machine to make sure it didn’t make sense back when it was written?
TBH I only occasionally do some C# and C++ for about 20 years in my spare time, but even if I were hypothetically qualified to fix the world i’m kind of just planning to sit back and watch all of the sloppers go bankrupt for ruining their companies.
Bold of you to assume anyone is going to care enough to hire professionals to fix old software. They’re just going to vibe code a new program with the new whizbang-5000 LLM.
Who is this borrow checker, and why is he so judgemental?
He who controls all of the memories that have been randomly accessed.
We need a programmer_tragedy community for this stuff instead. 💀🤡
This is the new normal, it seems. My developer colleagues are bragging about how long it has been since they wrote a line of code.
My favorite is seeking feedback on reviews on stuff we own and people not responding and being like “I’m sorry I had Claude create 500+ PRs I can’t possibly respond to everything”
You don’t think there’s a problem with that!?!?
Insert talking machine, replace skill.
Same.
They always say that so proudly too. “It was all the AI bros!”
me staring at the mountain of shit they just plopped in front of me
Yes, I can tell.
Devs on my team are straight up saying in the sprint retros that the code is slop and needs to be modified after AI makes the suggestion. Our repo is being flooded with garbage that works out of the gate but costs so much extra to troubleshoot when it fails.
You’re using the wrong language. If it fails, it never worked out of the gate. You should say that it seemed like it’s working, but never actually did.
Sometimes I lament how long it has been since I wrote a single line of code, because I had to do reviews, testing, management, etc.
I guess some of us like the aspect of coding (as in writing code), while others only like the results (be it the product or the pay)
Yes, I have always enjoyed trying to create elegant architecture and code, more than I get satisfaction from the end result. I’ve always found it frustrating how many colleagues were prepared to throw together any old junk as long as the right thing came out in the end. On the positive side, maybe the AI does raise the quality of what some of them contribute.
checker?! i hardly know her!
