Profan

Even the people making software barely want to make software honestly, but you gotta make that daily bread somehow and sometimes it's kinda cool I guess? But like people overestimate the desire of the average person to be their own software maintainer, most people consume, not produce, regardless of ease and trying to turn everyone into a producer is... kind of the opposite of where society has been going for a very long time.

How about people like Inigo Quilez? I'd say they're still quite high profile in today's landscape. And the main thing is I think there's just way more people in the field overall today too, not everyone can be famous! It's totally fine to not be as high profile as literally one of the most well known people in a field, it's fine to just do it because you enjoy it! The math and art of graphics (and games in general) programming is beautiful in and of itself.

Good engineers should understand what goes on underneath them in the stack (at decreasing accuracy probably the more layers away it is) if they care about their craft and the quality of it, even if not in perfect detail, if you're just acknowledging that you've never even tried, then perfect! The AI "revolution" is just right for you.

In a game development context, especially where C++ interop is involved and a lot of code lives across a boundary where memory is owned by C++ but you want to avoid/minimize marshaling overhead or just generally maximize performance, the unsafe keyword is quite handy, but outside of those you can indeed probably get around by approximately never using it.

There's a lot of power C# gives you if carefully curated, making a lot of cases where people previously might have seen C++ as the only option as suddenly quite viable.

... See also the somewhat arcane Unsafe.As etc APIs

Literally any familiarity with the lore and it just makes sense, the kind of people the 40k lore would resonate with are unlikely to be AI chuds in the first place.

Though then again people do usually look way past any/all subtlety that might once have been intended and any franchise-ification of something usually destroys the remaining of originality as it becomes a facsimile of its original self.

But GW do seem to take reasonably good care of their IP and world, so I respect them for resisting the imminent slop-ification at least a little bit, there's enough shitty 40k work out there in both book and videogame form already. I'm sure the Abominable Intelligence will come for them eventually too, but until then, the emperor protects.

If anything OOP might actually be detrimental to many game engine applications (in a modern computing context in regards to the kind of data layouts and implementation patterns it encourages), and traits and "traditional" OOP (if you exclude implementation inheritance, which is largely cursed anyways) are real close together anyways, I think Rust is a great fit specifically for game engines at least, for gameplay programming I'm not as certain but for anything where you're mostly managing essentially data pipelines that need to go very fast and be reliable and not crashy, Rust is a great fit.

LLMs are here and Google Translate is still bad (surely, if it was easy as just plugging the miraculous perfect llms into it, it would be perfect now?), I don't think people who think we've somehow solved translation actually understand how much it still deals extremely poorly with.

And as others have said, language is more than just "I understand these words, this other person understands my words" (in the most literal sense, ignoring nuance here), but try getting that across to someone who believes you can solve language with a technical solution :)

hah well, transformative doesn't necessarily mean positive!

... it sure reads like slop

and you know what they say, if it walks like slop, quacks like slop and talks like slop, it's probably slop

The part of this that always confuses me is like nobody's aware gamejams exist, this has been a thing long before the LLM craze and people have been producing decent games on very limited timespans already, but people are forgetting how insanely high the bar is now, LLMs do not even remotely begin to fix the problem of your competition being incredibly stiff.

Just look at something like ludum dare and all the top entries (out of thousands of games submitted) are all usually quite polished given the timespan.

Yeah that's fair enough really, it is still surprising that there wasn't

I uh, surely you knew about visas before this?

I uhh, is this homeless larping? What in tarnation

Damn, why not just be happy for people? We're all different, and I might be an outlier here but I think very few people actually "hate" people, unless they've wronged them in some very particular way, at least for me personally someone has to have gone very far in wronging me or my friends for me to "hate" anyone!

It's not all or nothing, you can combine approaches :)

And if you're learning an alphabet where before you know 1000-2000 unique characters, you can't reasonably read anything, it's still very useful!

Plus who says that repetition techniques can't include context (like sentences for instance?), Bunpro being a pretty good example of this for learning Japanese grammar

Obviously don't just use SRS all day, consume media, read books, etc.

How do you think that "working hard" bit works and produces results?

Repetition!

If you're learning a language and trying to learn vocabulary, a new alphabet, etc, anything that involves lots of recall being necessary, spaced repetition is an excellent aid because without the basic shit you can't do any of the rest.

Plus it's supposed to be consistent over a (very long) time, not a "quick fix" so it's actually really the opposite of the "get slim quick" type schemes.

It's probably not especially useful when you're not cramming stuff/trying to build up a base to stand on, which lets you actually get on with the actual meat of the learning.

Eating reams of butter and cheese is a hell of a lot easier to sell than "hey you wanna go on this organ meat diet?" even if that's probably a lot more technically accurate

Heck, I'm a gamedev right now and I completely understand the not going back bit

Wow this stinks, I've been using this pretty heavily for the last while and really like it, but this kind of rugpull type thing is a pretty bad move.

I wonder, do all the old versions on pip stay there or are they planning on pulling those too, breaking everyones programs?

.. Mostly just wondering because the website seemingly doesn't mention it.

I just think things could be a little more aligned as I use C++ daily and often end up interacting with many different libraries and each has their own slightly idiosynchratic String/Vector/etc type, which quickly makes life.. interesting

But I see the point in it helping C++'s unusual longevity as well

Huh right I see, I do like the idea of that and I wish that is what the actual C++ stdlib was more like, it would make my life of using C++ a lot more pleasant than it currently is :)

(also sorry my initial comment came off like ragging on your library, it wasn't meant that way, it was more of a commentary on the overall state of the C++ ecosystem, so I appreciate people with a slightly broader view like yours!)

It's still funny to me how something titled "Sane C++ libraries" has zero interop with the STL; guaranteeing an even more fragmented C++ ecosystem.

C++ has its place, but something new could not possibly displace it soon enough, even with C it feels like libraries fit together more easily.

The only worse thing than Sweden practically doing nothing (saying this as an insufferable swede myself) are the insufferable articles somehow touting the superiority of the approach, as some sort of underdog or challenger?

The mention of Swedish exceptionalism rings true and some self-awareness would be helpful, not sure can you use that term unironically here..

In C (and C++) something as simple as forgetting to initialize a variable lands you in UB-land already, nearly every person I knew when I was learning myself (and still now) ran into these things _very quickly_.

Not to mention compilers make fun-times out of this by sometimes zeroing memory in debug and then not doing so for release builds (Hi MSVC!)..

The "thin layer over hardware" idea is a thing of the past as soon as optimizations come into the picture, and even then.

I wish standardizing documentation tooling (everyone uses a different tool today and ddoc by default has _no_ styling, no navigation, no nothing, so usually nobody writes docs for their code unless it's a big project like vibe.d) and IDE support was on this list (vscode centric tools exist and mostly work, but it's still fairly hit and miss) .. D's tooling has languished for a long time even if it is a great language otherwise.

That's nice to see, some of my pessismism may be unfounded then :)

These kinds of things are interesting, but at the same time I doubt the people making these things overlap with the set that build safety critical systems actually dealing with the constraints necessary to not kill people when things go wrong..

The article reads a bit like a rather long way for the author to excuse avoid learning a few of the natural languages of which it seems he would have much use. (Like French that they mention half their family speaking, or Mandarin with which they say they have a fascination..)

But also predicating all learning on its "objective usefulness" (however way you try to quantify this) seems short-sighted, what's the fun in learning something you know is useful but don't enjoy?

Somewhere there's a balance surely..