Claude did rewrote lots of my original messy code. No shame in that? But in the end the interest was in the underlying architecture, applied to nats protocol. Anyway.
I’d invite you to reconsider the kind of language you’re using to interact with other forum members here.
Dropping to profanities is not conducive to maintaining an environment that’s facilitating dialogue between its members.
I’ve seen you at least twice call other members here “you idiot”, “get lost”. Etc. Have a hard think as to whether you could rephrase that without the name calling, and if at worse you can’t manage to, you can always ask an LLM to do it for you.
Is the only zig community that Andrew Kelley "anti-endorses"[1]:
> I don’t have the time or energy to evaluate most Zig communities so I can neither endorse nor anti-endorse them, however, the Zig subreddit is an exception.
> It’s an awful place and I stand by my decision to permanently close it. I am unhappy that it was reopened against my will.
There may have been less pushback if this had been expressed up front. But also, what is it ? Is it to "test the architecture applied to nats" or is it to be a fully fledged NATs replacement (as per the impression given by table at the bottom of the website) - which becomes much harder if AI has significantly re-written the authors original code (and commented it badly).
Fair point. And as what it is, not a nats replacement, certainly dont have the time to maintain that this way, a test/tech demo/fun side project that yielded super interesting results is probably the answer. As usual I'm probably way too enthusiast when I see some nice results like that and the goal here was to talk about that, but it shifted super fast. So yes Claude rewrote lots of parts, and that's what I love about it. Testing an idea happens in way less time than before, and I find that super cool.
Nothing individually is a good indicator of slop in itself, a human could also have written this readme full of Claud-isms and a borked ASCII schema or the code littered with idiosyncratic comments.
It's the convergent set of clues that makes the case.
Claude did rewrote lots of my original messy code. No shame in that? But in the end the interest was in the underlying architecture, applied to nats protocol. Anyway.
a single commit doesn't mean it's vide coded you idiot
1/ AIs are terrible at Zig
2/ I happen to know the author personally
I’d invite you to reconsider the kind of language you’re using to interact with other forum members here.
Dropping to profanities is not conducive to maintaining an environment that’s facilitating dialogue between its members.
I’ve seen you at least twice call other members here “you idiot”, “get lost”. Etc. Have a hard think as to whether you could rephrase that without the name calling, and if at worse you can’t manage to, you can always ask an LLM to do it for you.
the way he came barging through the door doesn’t invite sympathy
1 reply →
> 1/ AIs are terrible at Zig
Claude isn't, and the zig subreddit is actually full of AI slop projects unfortunately.
And yesterday's front page Zig project was also vibe coded (though in that case the author acknowledged it: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46442792)
> zig subreddit
Is the only zig community that Andrew Kelley "anti-endorses"[1]:
> I don’t have the time or energy to evaluate most Zig communities so I can neither endorse nor anti-endorse them, however, the Zig subreddit is an exception.
> It’s an awful place and I stand by my decision to permanently close it. I am unhappy that it was reopened against my will.
[1]: https://ziglang.org/community/
1 reply →
Dude, when I move projects to GitHub I also often collapse everything into a single commit.
I do this to avoid having to check e-mail addresses and names in commits - maybe I mistakenly made a commit from my work account etc.
After the “initial” commit making it all public, I start to work “in the open”. I see many others doing it the same way.
That is NOT a reliable indicator of slop!
And the author has admitted at least some assistance here:
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46452907 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46452841
There may have been less pushback if this had been expressed up front. But also, what is it ? Is it to "test the architecture applied to nats" or is it to be a fully fledged NATs replacement (as per the impression given by table at the bottom of the website) - which becomes much harder if AI has significantly re-written the authors original code (and commented it badly).
The website being AI coded I can take or leave.
Fair point. And as what it is, not a nats replacement, certainly dont have the time to maintain that this way, a test/tech demo/fun side project that yielded super interesting results is probably the answer. As usual I'm probably way too enthusiast when I see some nice results like that and the goal here was to talk about that, but it shifted super fast. So yes Claude rewrote lots of parts, and that's what I love about it. Testing an idea happens in way less time than before, and I find that super cool.
Nothing individually is a good indicator of slop in itself, a human could also have written this readme full of Claud-isms and a borked ASCII schema or the code littered with idiosyncratic comments.
It's the convergent set of clues that makes the case.