The LLM part is bad news but it isn't the sign.
-
To explain what I mean by this: for a long time the Perl community took great pride in how difficult and terse the language was. The old joke that well-written perl was indistinguishable from line noise wasn't just a joke, it was a badge of honour.
That attitude was sustainable when the internet was small and alternatives were scarce. But the moment tools appeared that prioritized things like human ergonomics (python) and human interaction (ruby) the perl community started aging out and dying.
@mhoye This was not my experience of the Perl community. I found a lot of discourse about how to write humane and readable Perl. The people pushing this were anything but marginal.
-
@mhoye That would actually help new contributors understand how existing maintainers are using LLM “tools” the “right way”! It’s more process of course to be that rigorous in using an LLM to include how you’re using it when offering up code, but if it really is a “useful tool” then you have to teach people how to use it.
@mhoye @r343l yeah this part is fucking baffling.
Either commit and say "look we want them to be tagged so we know as much about provenance as possible" (even just for knowing which specific LLM model related reasons!)
Or say you don't have to disclose at all.
I feel like they know that there's backlash and they're trying to protect people from facing it. Which all I have to say to that is: cowards.
You don't get to have it both ways
-
@froztbyte @mhoye having worked on python packaging until they suddenly released "oh wait this guy is going to make things actually good" https://web.archive.org/web/20250218154403/https://cfp.packaging-con.org/2023/talk/hpuhu7/ and then having astral steal credit for my work and sell to openai and then seeing
uvpop up fucking EVERYWHERE having fucking EVERYONE rave about HOW FUCKING FAST IT IS when I FUCKING DID THAT SHIT—i think labor needs rights and protections@mhoye @froztbyte @hipsterelectron fun fact I was using
uvto manage things for a work project (idek why I normally use poetry) and then found out they ship Tk support but they don't bind with Xft which means the fonts look fucking awful -
@mhoye also I think almost everybody who regularly came to DC Perlmongers meetings in the day has moved on to other languages (if they're still programming at all), so it seems unlikely that even the olds who used to use Perl first would still make that choice.
-
@froztbyte @mhoye it puzzles me frankly particularly the rust part. rust is a microsoft fucking product now but nobody listens to packagers about bootstrap deps. i used rust for 10 years and made the zip crate the safest and fastest zip impl ever and i cannot contribute code to that system again until gccrs is complete
@mhoye @hipsterelectron @froztbyte recently I started trying to make a pure Rust Nixpkgs style bootstrap. Assuming you have a Rust compiler binary because that's a given we accept for C ++ (I think an older version of GCC was the only pure-C implementation that was reasonably modern? Less confident on that I thing there might be a C based EDG thing).
But guess what? That's nearly impossible even assuming you start with a binary! First you have to use Cranelift (still billed as experimental, doesn't ship unwinding by default because it possibly bloats binaries though I didn't encounter it) because otherwise you need C++ for LLVM. And even then you don't have an assembler which you need. So okay you write that because I don't think any currently exist.
And then I'm sure you hit some new issue but that's where I stopped for now.
Meanwhile somehow, incredibly, even with the rise of LLM produced projects redoing all kinds of things (I get it, it's a fun exercise) nobody has made a full C compiler in Rust yet. The closest is some Anthropic demonstrator that's been abandoned and isn't finished and a project @jyn started as far as I can tell.
So even if you get there and want to bootstrap from C to a whole compiler chain afterwards to get LLVM support for your Rust, too fucking bad.
I won't accept any issues people claim because you need a compiler binary I think it's arbitrary to allow the C++ compiler but not Rust, but holy shit if your language is going to be self hosting why on earth isn't that actually a full stack even on one platform?
-
@froztbyte @mhoye having worked on python packaging until they suddenly released "oh wait this guy is going to make things actually good" https://web.archive.org/web/20250218154403/https://cfp.packaging-con.org/2023/talk/hpuhu7/ and then having astral steal credit for my work and sell to openai and then seeing
uvpop up fucking EVERYWHERE having fucking EVERYONE rave about HOW FUCKING FAST IT IS when I FUCKING DID THAT SHIT—i think labor needs rights and protections@hipsterelectron @froztbyte @mhoye This shit right here is why I am not working on my seL4/Idris crap in public. Giving your shit away to comrades is fundamentally different from giving your shit away to the people in the power structures above you, and we need a way to encode and defend that distinction before we can have free software that doesn't feed the monsters.
-
@mhoye @hipsterelectron @froztbyte recently I started trying to make a pure Rust Nixpkgs style bootstrap. Assuming you have a Rust compiler binary because that's a given we accept for C ++ (I think an older version of GCC was the only pure-C implementation that was reasonably modern? Less confident on that I thing there might be a C based EDG thing).
But guess what? That's nearly impossible even assuming you start with a binary! First you have to use Cranelift (still billed as experimental, doesn't ship unwinding by default because it possibly bloats binaries though I didn't encounter it) because otherwise you need C++ for LLVM. And even then you don't have an assembler which you need. So okay you write that because I don't think any currently exist.
And then I'm sure you hit some new issue but that's where I stopped for now.
Meanwhile somehow, incredibly, even with the rise of LLM produced projects redoing all kinds of things (I get it, it's a fun exercise) nobody has made a full C compiler in Rust yet. The closest is some Anthropic demonstrator that's been abandoned and isn't finished and a project @jyn started as far as I can tell.
So even if you get there and want to bootstrap from C to a whole compiler chain afterwards to get LLVM support for your Rust, too fucking bad.
I won't accept any issues people claim because you need a compiler binary I think it's arbitrary to allow the C++ compiler but not Rust, but holy shit if your language is going to be self hosting why on earth isn't that actually a full stack even on one platform?
@Lunaphied @mhoye @froztbyte @jyn gcc has a reasonably well-documented bootstrap path from C99. even if i'd like it to be shorter the project takes it seriously and discusses bootstrapping as a concern on the mailing list which i really appreciate. i'm looking to improve the story for emacs atm
-
@hipsterelectron @froztbyte @mhoye This shit right here is why I am not working on my seL4/Idris crap in public. Giving your shit away to comrades is fundamentally different from giving your shit away to the people in the power structures above you, and we need a way to encode and defend that distinction before we can have free software that doesn't feed the monsters.
@hipsterelectron @froztbyte @mhoye Not that my shit is any good; just look at the rest of what I've put up prior to this if you doubt me. But it's the principle of the thing!
-
RE: https://woof.tech/@techokami/117439226690379216
The LLM part is bad news but it isn't the sign. It's the talking about planning succession while simultaneously complaining that nobody new wants to learn, that's the sign.
Y'all the kernel is in deep, deep trouble. We saw what happened to Perl and the kernel is in deep trouble.
@mhoye it appears to this reader that Linus hates people and likes a stochastic text machine.
-
@hipsterelectron @froztbyte @mhoye Not that my shit is any good; just look at the rest of what I've put up prior to this if you doubt me. But it's the principle of the thing!
@lykso @froztbyte @mhoye i like idris a lot and i have mixed feelings on seL4 but it is definitely cool software
-
P pelle@veganism.social shared this topic
-
@lykso @froztbyte @mhoye i like idris a lot and i have mixed feelings on seL4 but it is definitely cool software
@hipsterelectron @froztbyte @mhoye Yeah, your work sounds awesome and I am only pursuing the route I am because it seems like a good fit for my relatively limited abilities. These are the pieces I can see and use, and things feel like they are on fire right now so I'm doing what's in front of me. seL4 is juuust beyond the already-available, and I can reach that. You're reaching farther than I am; one day maybe I'll be building atop your work, but laying that groundwork is beyond me.
-
@Lunaphied @mhoye @froztbyte @jyn gcc has a reasonably well-documented bootstrap path from C99. even if i'd like it to be shorter the project takes it seriously and discusses bootstrapping as a concern on the mailing list which i really appreciate. i'm looking to improve the story for emacs atm
@froztbyte @jyn @mhoye @hipsterelectron yeah I mean I think it's stupidly long but at least it's possible. But it should still be one step from an existing binary of the compiler to a new binary of the compiler imo
-
@hipsterelectron @froztbyte @mhoye Yeah, your work sounds awesome and I am only pursuing the route I am because it seems like a good fit for my relatively limited abilities. These are the pieces I can see and use, and things feel like they are on fire right now so I'm doing what's in front of me. seL4 is juuust beyond the already-available, and I can reach that. You're reaching farther than I am; one day maybe I'll be building atop your work, but laying that groundwork is beyond me.
@lykso that is remarkably kind of you
-
@froztbyte @jyn @mhoye @hipsterelectron yeah I mean I think it's stupidly long but at least it's possible. But it should still be one step from an existing binary of the compiler to a new binary of the compiler imo
@Lunaphied curious about this since that is generally my experience with gcc. personally my build system will be maintaining an entirely acyclic bootstrap path from C99 and i absolutely agree that should be a goal for every language
-
@mhoye @hipsterelectron @froztbyte recently I started trying to make a pure Rust Nixpkgs style bootstrap. Assuming you have a Rust compiler binary because that's a given we accept for C ++ (I think an older version of GCC was the only pure-C implementation that was reasonably modern? Less confident on that I thing there might be a C based EDG thing).
But guess what? That's nearly impossible even assuming you start with a binary! First you have to use Cranelift (still billed as experimental, doesn't ship unwinding by default because it possibly bloats binaries though I didn't encounter it) because otherwise you need C++ for LLVM. And even then you don't have an assembler which you need. So okay you write that because I don't think any currently exist.
And then I'm sure you hit some new issue but that's where I stopped for now.
Meanwhile somehow, incredibly, even with the rise of LLM produced projects redoing all kinds of things (I get it, it's a fun exercise) nobody has made a full C compiler in Rust yet. The closest is some Anthropic demonstrator that's been abandoned and isn't finished and a project @jyn started as far as I can tell.
So even if you get there and want to bootstrap from C to a whole compiler chain afterwards to get LLVM support for your Rust, too fucking bad.
I won't accept any issues people claim because you need a compiler binary I think it's arbitrary to allow the C++ compiler but not Rust, but holy shit if your language is going to be self hosting why on earth isn't that actually a full stack even on one platform?
@Lunaphied @mhoye @hipsterelectron @froztbyte i’m confused why a pure-rust bootstrap path matters in practice
-
And for Linux as a plausibly community-managed meaningfully open as in open project, that clock is definitely ticking.
The end of this road is some corporate-funded retirement home for understaffed and underfunded projects once enough of the current devs have aged out without anyone growing into those roles, with private forks at companies that relied on the kernel, also privately relieved there's no need or reason to deal with antediluvian developer processes or bother giving back anymore.
@mhoye As soon as Torvalds threw his LLM tantrum insisting that Linux doesn't do social justice, and that the community is just a side-effect (and not literally the only thing that distinguished Linux thirty years ago from Minix and other UNIX clones), I think that it was pretty clear that the goal was to make Linux as close to proprietary as they can within the confines of the GPL, with the big corporate funders as stewards.
And I started evaluating replacements that week, too...
-
@mhoye It's a phenomenon I'm seeing a lot in FOSS circles lately: LLMs amplify a benevolent dictators ability to handle things on their own, which feeds into their need for control. That can manifest as anything from unwillingness to share work, to outright messages of hostility to potential recruits.
@lrhodes @mhoye@cosocial.Some Examples?
-
@Lunaphied curious about this since that is generally my experience with gcc. personally my build system will be maintaining an entirely acyclic bootstrap path from C99 and i absolutely agree that should be a goal for every language
@hipsterelectron @Lunaphied
That's what I'm trying to do though I am adding shims to allow some C23 things to work even on a C99 compiler.
...
Is shims the right word? I've seen the term "polyfills" used for the web but never seen it used for C versions. -
@thomaswilburn @mhoye I don't think "Linux development is only for the wealthy" is true.
Also, why contributing to the Linux kernel can only be done if you have access to an LLM? I mean, we can still develop like we did 5 years ago.
Personally I wouldn't contribute to projects that promote the usage of LLMs, but I don't see those things related.
@glaskows @thomaswilburn @mhoye because 5 years ago you would be reading and contributing to code written and documented by humans. now you are working on code that is generated by AI and very likely to be unreadable, messy, the documentation could be wrong or incorrect because it was hallucinated, etc etc.
the presence of any ai generated code in a project adds additional mental overhead for any humans working on it.
people who want to code without using AI will give up. people who do want to use AI will remain. more AI generated code will slip in. this vicious cycle will bleed the project of all people who can/want to work on the project by hand untill all that remains is people who depend on an AI to tell them what to do
what i mean by this is no you cant keep coding like you did 5 years ago in a project that allows ai contributions because ai contributions are actively hostile to coding like 5 years ago
-
@hal_pomeranz @mhoye BSDs are a shame, honestly. Fragmentation in the Linux world is bad, but fragmentation in the BSD world is on another level.
@tragivictoria @hal_pomeranz @mhoye tbh given how many projects have devolved into slop I'm grateful for fragmentation more often than not lately, redundancy and diversity are good things for an ecosystem
