@dang I think something might be going wrong with the automatic flagging in this thread. I’m seeing a few pretty normal comments that are all dead.
Readit NewsDeleted Comment
Fraterkes commented on Shader Academy: Learn computer graphics by solving challenges shaderacademy.com/... · Posted by u/pykello
I’m not from California, and I’m not a teen, but this hasn’t been my experience
Fraterkes commented on We rewrote the Ghostty GTK application mitchellh.com/writing/gho... · Posted by u/tosh
I haven't worked with GTK, but what you are describing here sounds reminiscent of what we have been dealing with trying to build Godot bindings in Zig with a nice API. the project is in mid-flight, but Godot:
- has tons of OOP concepts: classes, virtual methods, properties, signals, etc
- a C API to work with all of those concepts, define your own objects, properties, and so on
- manages the lifetimes of any engine objects (you can attach userdata to any of them)
- a whole tree of reference counted objects
working on this problem produced this library, which I am not proud of: https://github.com/gdzig/oopz
here's a snippet that kind of demonstrates the state of the API at the moment: https://github.com/gdzig/gdzig/blob/master/example/src/Signa...
also.. now I want to attempt to write a Ghostty frontend as a Godot extension
Thx for the work you're doing! Just out of curiosity, I sometimes struggle to write performant C# Godot code because it's hard to interface with the engine without doing a lot of back and forth conversions to engine types. You end up doing a lot of allocations. Did you run into that kind of stuff while creating your bindings?
Fraterkes commented on Bezier-rs – algorithms for Bézier segments and shapes graphite.rs/libraries/bez... · Posted by u/jarek-foksa
Interesting, I’m writing some code to find the interception of two clipping paths at the moment. I can’t use this because I have a no dependency rule but will take a look.
In case you end up coming up with your own solution: this is one of the best collections of info for what is currently out there Ive seen: https://github.com/linebender/kurbo/issues/277
Fraterkes commented on Bezier-rs – algorithms for Bézier segments and shapes graphite.rs/libraries/bez... · Posted by u/jarek-foksa
Almost even more interesting is the Bezier Boolean-Operations lib they use (it’s a rewrite of Pathbool.js (https://github.com/r-flash/PathBool.js) in Rust)
https://github.com/GraphiteEditor/Graphite/tree/master/libra...
There’s not a ton of robust curve boolean libs out there that aren’t just part of some huge package of tools. This is the only one I know of that isn’t Js.
(Edit: added a link)
This is a bit of a long shot, but a lot my social embarrassment comes from my tendency to mumble / be hard to understand. Anyone on here have any experience with improving at that stuff?
Really cool! Roughly how much memory does it take to include it in an engine? Also I'm really interested in the process of creating these really fast scripting languages, have you written anything about how you wrote Bolt?
> There’s a strange disconnect in the industry. On one hand, GitHub claims that 20 million users are on Copilot, and Sundar Pichai says that over 25% of the code at Google is now written by AI. On the other hand, independent studies show that AI actually makes experienced developers slower.
From the study[0]:
> 16 developers with moderate AI experience complete 246 tasks in mature projects on which they have an average of 5 years of prior experience.
This study continues to get a lot of airtime on HN and elsewhere. Folks probably should be skeptical of a study with the combination of a small number of subjects with a broad claim.
Shouldn’t users be equally skeptical of claims by ai companies? Id argue things even out in that case?
The implication is that I'm finding it straightforward to handle the issues that other people here seem to consider insurmountable. And they seem to be directly related to how good one is at building software.
I’ve seen claims of this flavour in the past, and it often turns out that the person making the claim is writing software that is a lot less novel / complicated than the software the other engineers (who struggle to find uses for ai) are writing.