Why so much negativity? I find these projects interesting for learning purposes and exploring new ways. What’s wrong with that?

▲

jillesvangurp 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

People feel threatened by LLMs doing things well that they feel should require their skills and talent.

That's understandable but it's still a bit of a negative emotion that probably isn't very productive. Or very rational. This thread is full of people trying to argue that this can't be any good, shouldn't be any good, and is clearly going to end in tears. And obviously this thing passing tens of thousands of carefully curated tests that accumulated over decades suggests otherwise. It's hard to argue against that.

This probably is going to have some new issues. But it's an impressive achievement.

▲

piker 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Because it’s uncomfortable to see decades of work copied so trivially.

▲

antihero 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

But that's the thing, without the decades of work, it wouldn't BE trivial.

Everyone is standing on the shoulders of those which came before. If LLMs allow us to combine the incredible decades of effort and knowledge and experiences that's gone into building something as great as Postgres, and take that and combine the experience and philosophy that has led to the creation of a language that potentially provides tangible benefits, and for far less human time and effort that it would have otherwise taken...surely something that should be celebrated as absolutely incredible?

	▲	jackphilson 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		But who is getting celebrated? The people who spent a lot of time on the original thing, or the AI rewrite that everyone now uses?

▲

alirezaxdehghan 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Imagine the feelings of a dude who used to code in assembly and then some punk writes in c++ and uses gcc... decades of work wasted.

▲

nasretdinov 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

I can trivially copy any code even without an LLM though with a simple tool called rsync!

▲

byzantinegene 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

can you enlighten me, what exactly do you learn from asking a llm to do a rewrite?

▲

queoahfh 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I am concerned about the quality. Even a cursory skim of the code makes the code appear asinine. Unless the genius aspects of the code elude me.

https://github.com/malisper/pgrust/blob/3646a73515a5e4ac7d0b...

▲

mataamad 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

This is a (slightly more typesafe) transliteration of the C code.

https://github.com/postgres/postgres/blob/2e6578292a9184dcaa...

▲

mechazawa 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Yeah same. The structure makes no real sense and when digging into the code it reads like I'm the first human to look at it.

	▲	0x000xca0xfe 44 minutes ago \| parent \| next [-]
		I'm too young but I imagine assembly programmers were feeling the same when automatic code generation by compilers took over. Very weird.
	▲	thewhitetulip 2 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		That's how Ai generated code is. I am almost convinced that Models are intentionally taught to write obtuse code because AI companies don't want us to write code at all

▲

bakugo 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

I don't really understand how "written by AI" and "for learning purposes" can ever be compatible. What exactly does one learn from typing "Rewrite this in Rust, make no mistakes" into a terminal?