Readit NewsThe only search results for this term are this article and promotional things for this company getting funded (Xavier)
this really is something...
It is rare to read something more moronic than that
The Rust equivalent of std::meta (procedural macros) are heavily used everywhere including in serialization framework, debugging and tracers.
And that's not surprising at all: Compile time introspection is much more powerful and lightweight than codegen for exactly the same usage.
It's not actually wrong though is it - real codebases have been implementing reflection and introspection through macro magic etc. for decades at this point.
I guess it's cool they want to fix it in the language, but as always, the approach is to make the language even more complex than it already is - e.g. two new operators (!) in the linked article
By the P2 era (97-98), especially as consoles show up, assembly's not desirable at all.
Pmode/w was released in 97 which speaks to the demand for a Watcom C/C++ protected mode extender at the time...
Not mentioned in the article, but this did allow for a port of the game to the OG XBOX (733 MHz PentiumⅢ box) way back in 2003, long before the game's eventual remake as RCT Classic for ARM etc in 2017.
Interesting that the XBOX port is RCT1+expansions even though it came out after RCT2 did on PC, maybe due to lesser requirements or probably just to avoid cannibalizing RCT2 PC sales and to double-dip people who had already paid for RCT1 PC: https://youtu.be/Vtincfkl8KY?t=75
Notably one of the XBOX games that has never been backwards compatible lol https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Xbox_games_compatible_...
RCT1 was one of those games that I spent entire summers playing as a kid (see also: SimCity 3000), entirely offline because tying up the house's single phone line with the modem wasn't allowed during the day. Even though RCT2 was objectively the better game it felt like an aesthetic downgrade, and I actively hated RCT3 and still do. RCT1's vibes are immaculate: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BitorD-HVuQ
Not sure if the clock speed is just for reference or emphasis re: efficiency, but RCT1 will in fact happily run on a Pentium 90 (which is still mind blowing to me given the scope of the game)
A friend in the UK had his deposit withheld as "mail charges" by his landlord upon moving out. Turned out the fine print in his lease said that he wasn't allowed to receive mail at the house he was legally renting.
Pretty sure that is not a stipulation you can legally put in a tenancy contract. Because both parties have to be able to serve notice on the other via post in writing. Same reason you are legally entitled to know the postal address of the landlord.
I'm leaving that utm_source in the link for irony, lol. Couldn't find it from the first page of Google, but AI found it in seconds.
The target for a great startup was 7% growth week-on-week, and now it's 10%. It means back then if you were making $1k/week in Jan 1, 2024, you'd expect to make $33k/week a year later. But thanks to AI, the standard is closer to $142k/week.
Back then, it was normal to raise $75k or so to build a prototype, now you can build a prototype in a couple of weekends. Back then, you would polish your pitch to get VC funding. Now you build, get the customers, then show what the customers are buying and why, and ask for funding to get 1000x the number of customers.
A lot of the risk factors have been removed. Building a legacy app no longer take multiple sync calls and weeks, they can be resolved in hours and maybe one sync call. Yes, I have a story of AI migrating a whole DB table when I asked it to move a button to another page. But it gets the tables right about 7 out of 10 times if you give it the right instructions. I dislike ORMs; they're practically a code smell. And AI works around that layer.
The story doesn’t state much about source but is it literally just an editorialised press release?
Just glancing at the bar graphs, the vision models mostly suck across the board for each question. Whereas verbal ones do OK.
And today's example of clock faces (#17) does a good job of demonstrating why: because when a lot of the diagrams are explained verbally, it makes it significantly easier to solve.
Maybe it's just me, but #17 for example - it's not immediately obvious those are even supposed to represent clocks, and yet the verbal prompt turns each one into clock times for the model (e.g. 1:30) which feels like 50% of the problem being solved before the model does anything at all.