Re:We tasked Opus 4.6 using agent teams to build a C Compiler
by bopbopbop7 on Thursday February 05, 2026 @05:33PM
(#46906366)
Some people care more about compiler speed than the correctness? I would love to meet these imaginary people that are fine with a compiler that is straight up broken. Emitting working code is the baseline, not some preference slider.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:We tasked Opus 4.6 using agent teams to build a C Compiler
by fragmede on Thursday February 05, 2026 @05:57PM
(#46906606)
Let's pretend, for just a second, that the people who do, having been able to learn how to program, are not absolute fucking morons. Straight up broken is obviously not useful, so maybe the conclusions you've jumped to could use some reexamination.
Re:We tasked Opus 4.6 using agent teams to build a C Compiler
by gerdesj on Thursday February 05, 2026 @09:07PM
(#46908108)
You might have not run Gentoo. Most Gentooers will begrudgingly but eventually admit to cooking their own gonads when updating a laptop.
Anyway, please define: "correctness".
Re:We tasked Opus 4.6 using agent teams to build a C Compiler
by ndesaulniers on Friday February 06, 2026 @01:58PM
(#46916685)
> I would love to meet these imaginary people that are fine with a compiler that is straight up broken.
That's not what I said; you're attacking a strawman.
My point was more so that some people prefer the madness that is -funsafe-math-optimizations, or happen to rely on UB (intentionally or otherwise). What even is "correct" in the presence of UB? What is correct in such case was left up to interpretation of the implementer by ISO WG14.