nosman

In my experience, AI does really well with a good type system. It tries something, if it doesn't compile, looks at the message, fixes, etc etc.

The compiler itself acts as a steering function for the AI. I've also had this experience with Rust.

That and when people use "exponential" to mean big.

The code itself might suck but the data on how the companies themselves track issues, work on the issues, handle PRs, etc would be extremely valuable no? Training the AI on what successfully completing a task means would make a lot of sense.

The bad guys are using Tolkien references. The good guys are probably using Hitchhiker's Guide references...

What do you mean by public services?

All kinds of companies lose millions of dollars of revenue per day if not hour if their sites are not stable.... apple, amazon, google, Shopify, uber, etc etc.

Those companies have decided the extra complexity is worth the reliability.

Even if you're operating a tech company that doesn't need to have that kind of uptime, your developers probably need those services to be productive, and you don't want them just sitting there either.

I don't know why people automatically jump to Apple's defense on this.... They absolutely did spend a lot of money and hired people to try this. They 100% do NOT have the open and bottom-up culture needed to pull off large scale AI and software projects like this.

Source: I worked there

This is true, but a team using rust will probably care more about resource use in general.

I do agree it's kind of a misleading headline, the real update is their use of Flatbuffers.

I hope that this is the start of developers being conscious of using resources efficiently again, especially in the browser.

The more rust gets written, the better AI will be able to write it for people... I like to be optimistic.

I think those are two separate concerns. Writing code and running a tech business are two different things. I personally love Ocaml and think it's an excellent language and very underrated. However, I (probably) wouldn't want a production-ready system written in it, because it has a weaker ecosystem of libraries and frameworks, and it's harder to hire experienced people who already know or are willing to learn the language.

how does this work if i import two different gems that both monkeypatch the same classes?

Even if you can see the source, it still seems difficult to understand where the monkeypatch came from if you have transitive dependencies and whatnot.

Did you read the article? The point is that they're adopting memory management features inspired by rust to give programmers more fine-grained control.