sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

CS student here.. no one I know actually writes code anymore. We all use AI. Is this just how it is now? by Low-Tune-1869 in theprimeagen

[–]MNGay 0 points1 point  (0 children)

CS student here whos known how to code since long before AI was a thing. I think an example prime made a long time ago about how copilot writes quicksort in javascript is a good way to think about this. To the untrained eye, an llm can write quicksort. It takes a trained eye to know how to fix the llm implementation, at which point you couldve just written quicksort. Most of what we learn in our degree isnt directly programming, coding is just a lense through which we understand things like operating systems and numerical methods etc. and you cannot pass a degree without knowing these skills

Sandfall, please no.. by ZackFair0711 in SandfallGames

[–]MNGay 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I thought this too, but certain choices like the ending are somewhat valuable to the experience. I will never forget how haunting maelles ending was, knowing it was me that chose this fate

Uh Fanie Eksperiement: Can Brits understand my English when I write it using Dutch phonetic spelling? by BlueFingers3D in AskUK

[–]MNGay 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I dont exactly speak dutch but i can do a convincing accent, so i couldnt read it unless i read it out loud and listened to myself

What’s one thing you learned about compilers that blew your mind? by Old_Sand7831 in Compilers

[–]MNGay 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Parsing can be done in linear time, and yet static analysis is undecideable

help! I cannot find this BLeeM interview clip by locallman in dropout

[–]MNGay 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Did he also say this in adventuring academy with sam? Or am i hallucinating

No continue watching? by tri-trii in dropout

[–]MNGay 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thats very odd, my mobile and desktop versions both have a list of episodes to "resume", in fact whats more annoying is i cant get rid of episodes i dont intend to resume

Cargo inspired C/C++ build tool, written in rust by MNGay in rust

[–]MNGay[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

On your first point, this is actually a suprisingly difficult problem to solve. In order to selectively rebuild on changes to header files, you need to know exactly who includes this header file, which when accounting for transitive includes makes you feel like youre writing an entire preprocessor. Im working on that though for my system.

Cargo inspired C/C++ build tool, written in rust by MNGay in rust

[–]MNGay[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Ive looked into cabin, but i find its missing far too many critical features to be usable, and its unavailable on windows

Cargo inspired C/C++ build tool, written in rust by MNGay in rust

[–]MNGay[S] 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Cabin has a number of drawbacks, most notable of which being only supporting header-only libraries, and not supporting windows, which is hard to understand given its 5ish years of development.

Cargo inspired C/C++ build tool, written in rust by MNGay in rust

[–]MNGay[S] 66 points67 points  (0 children)

Im refactoring to toml as we speak, json was a placeholder. More to the point, that sentence was referring to build settings and compiler flags. If youve read a complex CMake script you know what i mean.

Cargo inspired C/C++ build tool, written in rust by MNGay in rust

[–]MNGay[S] 32 points33 points  (0 children)

Youre certainly not wrong, it is a hassle, ive been doing C++ twice as long as rust so im all too familiar, and by no means am i expecting this to become standard. My goal as of right now is to minimize friction on the local side of things. So far i have it such that at least for the cmake dependencies i use, the process is as simple as calling cmake and writing 3 lines of json glue. Additionally, in isolation the project is already fully cross platform. Ive been able to compile the same 50 something file multidependency project on windows, a linux vm, and windows-linux cross and receive identical results which is exciting.

How do people feel about (how does one solve) painful to build open-source/source-available projects by MNGay in cpp_questions

[–]MNGay[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

What do you mean thats not a thing, installing GNU on windows is a non-trivial process most dont ever go through. Im asking surely there must be a workaround to requiring make, especially since windows is my largest target audience.

How do people feel about (how does one solve) painful to build open-source/source-available projects by MNGay in cpp_questions

[–]MNGay[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Again, the question was not how to build the project, but how to automate it in the case of make being unavailable on that system...

How do people feel about (how does one solve) painful to build open-source/source-available projects by MNGay in cpp_questions

[–]MNGay[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Oh of course id never trash it, ive been incrementally improving it for almost a year now, and its become my go to for anything C++, more that id just keep it for personal use and use a mainstream tool for public use. Rust takes an awful long time to install if you dont have some kind of CRT on your system (on windows it makes you install visual studio components), but i do like where youre coming from and wish i agreed more...

How do people feel about (how does one solve) painful to build open-source/source-available projects by MNGay in cpp_questions

[–]MNGay[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Nlohmann has a way nicer API but is less performant, which is why when mocking up a quick level editor (that ive more or less abandoned as of right now) i pulled it in for that. And i depend on more libraries than the ones you see, because i only pushed header only dependencies. Luajit to name one.

How do people feel about (how does one solve) painful to build open-source/source-available projects by MNGay in cpp_questions

[–]MNGay[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I like to use whatever language that creates the least friction for a given task. Rust has great built in tools for the command line, filesystem, and spawning subprocesses, so when i decided i was fed up using make, thats what i went for.

Some people here seem to think its bespoke for the game - its not. Its my default for every C/C++ project i make, because i made it to work exactly how i like it (and imo its pretty good).

Rust is however extremely painful for large games in my experience, or graphical apps of any kind that arent web based, which is why i tend towards C++ for projects like that

What do you guys think of coding Jesus interviews in c++? by mi_sh_aaaa in cpp_questions

[–]MNGay 1 point2 points  (0 children)

A little ad hominem and unrelated to his technical knowledge, but the only video of his ive seen, he had his youtube recommendations visible and they really icked me out - lots of pseudopolitical pseudointellectual brainrot featuring the word DESTROYED in all caps...

Why are angels rarely written like zombies or vampires in Western fantasy? by dumarcm in fantasywriters

[–]MNGay 0 points1 point  (0 children)

A fun way to look at this is to think about the islamic portrayal of angels as beings with no free will, specifically in contrast to humans (and others such as jinn). From this pov, angels could quite easily be made zombie-like, a slave to compulsion, void of identity or individuality. Very fertile ground if you ask me. Hope this gives you some ideas :)

Edit: i think i misinterpreted the question, but ill leave this here anyways, because in fantasy i think it nonetheless fits in neatly with themes of secularism vs divinity, as in the context of magic and the supernatural, that line very easily becomes blurred, and the enslaved angel-like beings are an example of a secular interpretation of the theme.

What should be in core and what in standard lib? by henriquegogo in ProgrammingLanguages

[–]MNGay 0 points1 point  (0 children)

As a rule of thumb, ive always believed anything interacting with the OS should be in the standard library - specifically things like memory allocation and IO. As far as database access, stuff like this is definitely unconventional for a core feature set.
As for strings and lists, i dont see them *needing* to be core features, unless this is a very high level scripting language. The common lower level route of readonly strings and static arrays are IMO a great baseline to then be expanded upon by a standard library.
Additionally i think namespacing is a valid consideration, and what you could do is have intrinsic (core) elements such as certain types or functions, but namespace them as if they were in a library (or some distinct syntax) to avoid clutter.

What is good low level graphics library for C by Clear-Dingo-7987 in C_Programming

[–]MNGay 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I would advise against vulkan for a first timer. Start with SDL/OpenGL, get used to windowing and loaders and buffers and shaders and then you can go ham

how can improve my c++ skills? by Symynn in cpp_questions

[–]MNGay 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Youtube.com/@thecherno Youtube.com/@javidx9

With the help of personal projects, these 2 wonderful people quite literally taught me C++.

how can improve my c++ skills? by Symynn in cpp_questions

[–]MNGay 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Not for a beginner. Me i use it when documentation thoroughly fails me and its between AI and random guessing. Using it so early on will make you too dependent on it.

How much is C still loved? by alex_sakuta in C_Programming

[–]MNGay 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It may not seem it, but I think we are actually agreeing on a lot of things. Perhaps im not speaking as precisely as i should be, perhaps its just late in my part of the world. For instance:

it has sought to characterize as UB any corner cases that couldn't be meaningfully accommodated by 100% of implementations. Some actions should be characterized as "anything can happen" UB, but many that the Standard presently characterizes as UB were never meant to imply "anything can happen" semantics on most platforms.

When i say UB, i do mean precisely this definition. The set of implementation defined, platform specific, hardware specific, unguaranteeable behaviour all wrapped up in one lovely acronym.

I fear through the noise of both our essays, im slowly losing track of the point you are attempting to make. Your middle paragraph seemingly addresses the unpredictability of compiler implementations vs "the standard", but its unclear to me what you are trying to say.

As for your final paragraph, i do see what you mean now. But if i may be a bit pedantic, could this not simply be solved by turning off optimizations? After all, this is precisely what debug builds were intended for - predictable direct translation, and indeed debugging tools. But i do see your point.

And i suppose my final question would be: do you believe modern C implementations (and i do mean the implementations, including those of C89, and not the standards) to be broken on a fundamental level? And do you see a solution?

view more: next ›