Readit NewsIf you think nutritional science is too unreliable, I can see that perspective. The conclusion then should be “I don’t know” not “trust the people who argue with psychological techniques instead of science”.
And the fact that people do not care is just as, if not more, concerning.
This is how you get MAHA, which I support bc of this, craziness included.
Clarity is likely the most important aspect of making maintainable, extendable code. Of course, it’s easy to say that, it’s harder to explain what it looks like in practice.
I wrote a book that attempts to teach how to write clear code: https://elementsofcode.io
> 11. Abstractions don’t remove complexity. They move it to the day you’re on call.
This is true for bad abstractions.
> The purpose of abstraction is not to be vague, but to create a new semantic level in which one can be absolutely precise. (Dijkstra)
If you think about abstraction in those terms, the utility becomes apparent. We abstract CPU instructions into programming languages so we can think about our problems in more precise terms, such as data structures and functions.
It is obviously useful to build abstractions to create even higher levels of precision on top of the language itself.
The problem isn’t abstraction, it is clarity of purpose. Too often we create complex behavioral models before actually understanding the behavior we are trying to model. It’s like a civil engineer trying to build a bridge in a warehouse without examining the terrain where it must be placed. When it doesn’t fit correctly, we don’t blame the concept of bridges.
But also worth noting that whenever you make an abstraction you run the risk that it's NOT going to turn out increase clarity and precision, either due to human limitation or due to changes in the problem. The author's caution is warranted because in practice this happens really a lot. I would rather work with code that has insufficient abstraction than inappropriate abstraction.
react native flutter ionic
and now swift.
it seems dart + flutter still is the only way to do all targets (cli/web/iOS/android/desktop) though. react native being very close (albeit needs electron).
it surprises me that this hasn't been perfected. surely some big company would look at their balance sheet and see it's worth it even if you take a 10% performance hit on each platform, assuming you can share 90% of the code.
does swift have a good web story or is wasm the main way? desktop?
> "But I need to debug!"
> Do you debug JVM bytecode? V8's internals? No. You debug at your abstraction layer. If that layer is natural language, debugging becomes: "Hey Claude, the login is failing for users with + in their email."
Folks can get away without reading assembly only when the compiler is reliable. English -> code compilation by llms is not reliable. It will become more reliable, but (a) isn’t now so I guess this is a project to “provoke thought” (b) you’re going to need several nines of reliability, which I would bet against in any sane timeframe (b) English isn’t well specified enough to have “correct” compilation, so unclear if “several nines of reliability” is even theoretically possible.
They’ve clearly bought too much into AI hype if they thought telling the agent to “do good” would work. The result was obviously pissing the hell out of rob pike. They should stop it.
Deleted Comment
I basically only swipe back. This aligns web pages with iOS nav stacks.
They don't appear there organically.
dyld has one principal author, who would 100% quit and go to the press if he was told (by who?) to insert a back door. The whole org is composed of the same basic people as would be working on Linux or something. Are you imagining a mass of people in suits who learned how to do systems programming at the institute for evil?
Additionally, do you work in tech? You don’t think bugs appear organically? You don’t think creative exploitation of bugs is a thing?