@64kb Yes, we still need to get the CO₂ out of the atmosphere eventually.
But if warming gets problematic, countries most affected will do this.
What LLMs do when they code is actually two things:
1. Translate from natural language to executable code
2. Expand a very high-level overview into a lot of detail
Each of these is great. Having them only available inextricably combined is a problem.
Thoughts?
HTMXNative is taking shape: my little ToDOMVC demonstrator is running identically on macOS, iOS, Android and the web.
No Electron.
Binary size 4MB.
The only JS is a modified htmx.
And the application logic is the same single Objective-Smalltalk Software-IC (bundle).
Der Gasausbau war und ist zentraler und essenzieller Bestandteil der gescheiterten deutschen Energiewende.
Altkanzler Schröder: '...die deutsche Energiepolitik aus der Abhängigkeit der Kernenergie zu befreien. "Wir fanden deshalb, dass es Sinn macht, auf Gas zu setzen."'
Wer Atomausstieg sät wird Fossil ernten.
Der frühere Bundeskanzler Gerhard Schröder hat vor dem Parlamentarischen Untersuchungsausschuss zur Klimastiftung im Landtag von Mecklenburg-Vorpommern ausgesagt. Schröder wurde per Videokonferenz aus seinem Büro zugeschaltet. Das Interesse war enorm, kein Besucherplatz blieb leer.
The only one who is straw-manning and not reading is you.
You have consistently debated things I did not write and have not come anywhere close to claiming.
Try reading AND understanding.
Then we could possibly have a chance of having a discussion.
But not like this.
Good grief.
Bye.
OK. So C++, even if not ideal, is one of the type systems you like. And so one that should result in fewer bugs.
And yet, C++ was in the study that showed no benefits for languages with static type systems.
That's the empirical evidence.
I am sorry that reality does not conform to your expectations.
I don't know what the mechanism is, but I don't have to understand the mechanism to understand what the empirical evidence unequivocally shows.
I can think of a few mechanisms, but that's also speculation. Just like your speculation that "prevents classes of bugs" must result in "less bugs in delivered software".
The empirical evidence that this is not the case is not speculation.
The difficulty is that you are confusing "ought" with "is".
And also confusing "prevents bugs" with "results in less buggy software".
I have *never* claimed the "nonsense" that type systems can't prevent bugs.
What the *empirical evidence* unambiguously shows is that this does NOT result in software that is less buggy, despite your wishful thinking.
Do you understand the difference between empirical evidence and your reasoning of what consequences *should* be?
Good grief.
It illustrates the documentation benefits of static typing using a C/Objective-C snippet.
That's it.
In your original post, you talked about moving from C to C++.
Does C++ have the kind of type system you like? What about Typescript?
How does what you "like" impact the fact that there is no evidence for static typing actually reducing bugs?
Or are you just going to keep no-scotsmaning this?
