By that logic the only non-arbitrary dimension is defined by gravity, so the primary axis (X) should be up and down.
Math is not rigid like you are saying: 3D coordinates can be oriented in any direction because they are fundamentally arbitrary. A lot of people a damn lot smarter than you have damn good reasons for using different coordinate systems, and they are mathematically correct.
By your own logic there is no “up”, only x/y/z, so what’s your complaint?
There is NO mathematical or physical reason why XY should be the floor, that is your own bias.
Thank god, this is the one true coordinate system
Yeah the first one is a left handed coordinate system.
Eh sort of? It’s all a matter of perspective. In Blender which uses a right hand system, when you view from the side, right is positive Y, up is positive Z, and towards the user is positive X.
But looking from above, positive X is right, positive Y is up, and positive Z is towards the camera. Obviously if you rotate the camera to be viewing from the negative side of the axis some directions get flipped.
Basically if you’re axis aligned, things work out the way you would expect.
Only in a top-down perspective. Most screens are vertically oriented though, meaning the reference 2D plane is left-right-up-down.
Constitutionally, no. But when has the constitution ever stopped Trump?
Tensions rise? I think we call that aggression, not tension.
Isn’t that the final step in the testing plan for every app though? The first step is always opening it.
A bug like this means literally nobody tested it at all on this build, or was so apathetic they didn’t file an obvious issue.
Vibe coding or no, this is a massive QA failure.
OK sure if you want to be pedantic. The point is that LLMs can do things traditional code generators can’t.
You don’t have to like it or use it. I myself am very vocal about the weaknesses and existential dangers of AI code. It’s going to cause the worst security nightmares in humanity’s recorded history. I recommend to companies that they DON’T trust LLMs for their coding because it creates unmaintainable nightmares of spaghetti code.
But pretending that they have NO advantages over traditional code generators is utter silliness perpetuated by people who refuse to argue in good faith.
I think you underestimate the amount of business logic contained in boilerplate. (Or maybe we’re just talking about different definitions of what boilerplate is). LLMs can understand that business need while most code generators cannot.
You’re focused too much on the “inventing” and not enough on the “one time”. A flexible solution can find value even if it’s otherwise inferior to a rigid one.
Or even distinguish between two versions of the same library. Absolutely stupid that LLMs default to writing deprecated code just because it was more common in the training data.
No, but the business requirements obviously are. Code does not exist in a vacuum.
Sure, I’ve used that too in the past.
Well, worst case scenario someone can fork it.