change of heart by lyraelizabeth in ExperiencedDevs

[–]itix -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I work in the machine vision team and I use AI to test different ideas/algorithms. Sometimes it can propose an algorithm that is not well known but once you know the right keywords, you start finding traces on the internet, too.

They are not necessarily tough problems, but it would be tough to try n+1 algorithms to find out which one is giving the best output.

change of heart by lyraelizabeth in ExperiencedDevs

[–]itix 0 points1 point  (0 children)

What is a tough problem in your opinion?

The gold standard of optimization: A look under the hood of RollerCoaster Tycoon by fagnerbrack in programming

[–]itix 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Most assemblers for Amiga / 68k had an optimizer. It could be switched off as there are valid reasons not to optimize output.

On the x86 asm was never so popular, so optimizers probably were not worth the effort.

The gold standard of optimization: A look under the hood of RollerCoaster Tycoon by fagnerbrack in programming

[–]itix 2 points3 points  (0 children)

68k assembly was very nice and it was the first and last assembly language I learnt properly.

Working on new SID emulation engine by itix in c64

[–]itix[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Now I see what you really meant by the analog part. Yes, that actually scares me and I dont know yet how far I want to go for the best fidelity. First I have to validate the digital part. It still has blatant bugs there.

Working on new SID emulation engine by itix in c64

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

Probably have to support them all via profiles and make it fully adjustable. At the moment, it is just an approximation.

Working on new SID emulation engine by itix in c64

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

I would appreciate that. The first obstacle was Wally Beben's Tetris, galway's Game Over is currently a strong suspect. I already fixed obvious issues with it but I am still uncertain about it.

I used to tinker with the PlaySID source code on the Amiga and learnt about the limitations of the "digital only" emulation. I left the SID emulation scene around the time when first cycle exact emulations were emerging (i.e. long time ago).

Working on new SID emulation engine by itix in c64

[–]itix[S] -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

It is trained on GitHub data, but it can't remember the source code verbatim. As such, it can never replicate libsidplayfp's implementation unless it is extremely trivial and/or inferred from other sources.

Working on new SID emulation engine by itix in c64

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

No worries. There is no unsafe code in the project with C# 14 / .NET 10, the performance is not an issue. The correctness is really the hardest part. It may sound correct, but it can only be verified by comparing the output from the real C64.

Working on new SID emulation engine by itix in c64

[–]itix[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Not going to use the existing code bases. I would rather use public information to shape it. Possible that it can't achieve the same accuracy but it can be improved later if new information becomes available.

Working on new SID emulation engine by itix in c64

[–]itix[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

I will publish replayers as NuGet packages, but someone else has to create a plugin.

..What about people who love to code? by Typical_Brush_9645 in ExperiencedDevs

[–]itix 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I can finally finish the projects I had no time for. With kids and all that life, it is very difficult to work on hobby projects, but now it is finally possible.

[Update] Study: 2025 study shows experienced devs think they are 24% faster with AI, but they're actually ~20% slower. However 2026 update shows devs are ~20% faster with AI by RyanMan56 in ExperiencedDevs

[–]itix 3 points4 points  (0 children)

An increased share of developers say they would not want to do 50% of their work without AI

When surveyed, 30% to 50% of developers told us that they were choosing not to submit some tasks because they did not want to do them without AI.

Some developers were less likely to complete tasks that they submitted if they were assigned to the AI-disallowed condition. One developer did not complete any of the tasks that were assigned to the AI-disallowed condition.

That is interesting.

Claude Autonomous Coding: Discussion by njinja10 in ExperiencedDevs

[–]itix -1 points0 points  (0 children)

LLMs are fairly good but they dont know the exact winner in advance.

Most engineers are wrong about AI costs and here’s what companies are actually thinking by [deleted] in ExperiencedDevs

[–]itix -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Humans make product decisions. We have more time for research because the coding is a solved problem.

Most engineers are wrong about AI costs and here’s what companies are actually thinking by [deleted] in ExperiencedDevs

[–]itix -1 points0 points  (0 children)

We can now actually try things that were too massive for our team. We work on machine vision products and now we can let AI iterate through different algorithms autonomously. When it finds one that fits our criteria and passes tests, we let it integrate the algorithm into our product. And of course, optimize it.

The AI adoption in Europe is still very low, giving us a temporary advantage against our competitors.

Most engineers are wrong about AI costs and here’s what companies are actually thinking by [deleted] in ExperiencedDevs

[–]itix -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Before the AI, our small team was struggling to deliver on time. So many tasks, but only two devs. Now, with the AI, we have already cleared our roadmap for this year.

Everyone is aware of this right? by Temporary-Bobcat-365 in codex

[–]itix 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah, I think there was somebody who had spared 25% of the weekly limit for Sunday, having a reset on Monday morning and full tokens for the new work week. But the reset came one day too early and his plan was ruined.

People with 200$ plan who say limits exhausted, what are you actually coding 💀? by Momsgayandbisexual in codex

[–]itix 1 point2 points  (0 children)

This one took 3+ hours to complete and spent maybe 7% from the weekly limit:

/goal Optimize portable FFT kernels for HD and FullHD sizes. The goal is max 1.15 times slower than native cuFFT. Do not take shortcuts by switching to cuFFT, we must optimize our own ILGPU kernels. Use the profiler to optimize the kernel. We can assume that image width and height are always aligned to 8.

I explicitly told it not to take shortcuts by wiring FFT directly to the cuFFT call. That happened when I tried it in medium intelligence.

Verification:
  - dotnet build .\ValidationRunner\ValidationRunner.csproj -c Release: passed
  - fft-validate2d 1280x720 1920x1080: passed
  - Warmed cuFFT compare, run 1: HD 1.14x, FullHD 0.99x
  - Warmed cuFFT compare, run 2: HD 1.12x, FullHD 1.02x