so no. Before llms came around, lots of people were hobby programmers. We learned. Sorry to be blunt, but being a hobbyist is not an excuse. The best programmers I know are hobbyists

i haven’t come across many. But i have written a lot.

by “completing it” do you mean having something that seems like it works? Or something that you know works? If it’s the former then you’ve just had the computer do the easy part (creating something) and skipped the actually hard part (making it robust).

Are errors handled properly, is all input being validated? If using https, are you actually verifying certificates? This sort of thing

cryptic != complex. Are they cryptic? yes. Are they complex? not really, if you can understand “one or more” or “zero or more” and some other really simple concepts like “one of these” or “not one of these” or “this is optional”. You could explain these to a child. It’s only because they look cryptic that people think they are complex. Unless you start using backreferences and advanced concepts like those (which are not usually needed in most cases) they are very simple. long != complex

yes, “complex” regexes are quite simple too. Complex regexes are long, not difficult. They appear complex because you have to “inline” everything. They really are not that hard.

does the regex search for what you wanted to? Does it work in all cases? Can I be confident that it will find all instances i care about, or will I still have to comb the code manually?

tests can never prove correctness of code. All they can prove is “the thing hasn’t failed yet”. Proper reasoning is always needed if you want a guarantee.

If you had the llm write the regex for you, I can practically guarantee that you won’t think of, and write tests for, all the edge cases.

yes they can. I regularly do. Regexes aren’t hard to write, their logic is quite simple. They’re hard to read, yes, but they are almost always one-offs (ex, substitutions in nvim).

1% slowdown is pretty bad. You’d still do better just not using it. 19% is huge!

yes, but that doesn’t help if the software refuses to run on modern java

got a pc with a good deal. First thing I did was electrically cut off all unnecessary leds

the driver itself is kilobytes in size. Megabytes is huge for such a simple thing

most code from the before times, from the long-long-ago, actually didn’t need a browser, and could fit on a floppy disk!

writing code that doesn’t need a browser to run on

I don’t see a ball in any of the nets. So there are zero goals in that image

because the over 70 different binaries of systemd are “not modular” because they are designed to work together. What makes a monolith is, apparently, the name of the overarching project, not it being a single binary (which again, it’s not)

i let the wife do it. She enjoys it, I don’t

apart from sharing a cpu architecture, that’s pretty much where the similarity ends. Just because the cpu is x64 doesn’t mean the software will work with the rest of the architecturally different hardware (ex. data buses that simply don’ t exist on pc)

a lambdo which can only contain one expression, and not even a statement is pretty much useless. For anything nontrivial you have to write a separate function and have the lambda be just a function call expression. Which completely defeats the point

every chat app needs over a gig of ram to itself for “developer productivity”