Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by ndr 24 days ago
This is uncharitable, but makes a prediction. I imagine you'd bet the author won't be successfully using this, at MS/Uber or wherever they are, in a year time?

Rust makes no promise of being terser than C++, and RSL does less than this considering the optimization.

Also it's only 45/50k LOC so not so very from the 36k LOC.
1 comments
kikimora 23 days ago
Yes, I would bet it won't go anywhere.

The blog post mentioned the project is 130k LoC multiple times. Where 45/50k LoC comes from?

>Rust makes no promise of being terser than C++

True, but Rust has no header files, this alone is a great LoC saver.

link
ndr 23 days ago
50k LOC wouled be the rust code without tests.

But it's not apples to apples because they seem to have done much more performance work though, this is far from code golfing.

link
kikimora 23 days ago
RSL’s 36k LoC includes tests and should be compared with 130k LoC, not 50.

Having 90k LoC of tests for 50k LoC codebase also a problem. At least in my experience LLM generate too many tests. It does not evolve test suite but throws more code into it as development happens. Unless I aggressively refactor tests I quickly end up with a test suite that I don’t understand. Then LLM modifies tests to “make code work” and I have no idea if this is a legit edit or LLM cheats. I wonder if the same thing is happening or about to happen with this codebase.

link