Writing a compiler/interpreter is _extremely_ straightforward; a lexer -> parser -> ast -> semantic analysis -> {codegen -> linker | evaluator} pipeline is a very widely understood and tested way to write a compiler in any language, regardless of what language you are trying to compile. The hard part is _learning_ how it works, but after that implementing a compiler is a kind of mechanical activity. That's why LLMs are so great at writing parsers: they can just read the source of any compiler (and they probably read all of them) and apply the same stuff mechanically, with almost a 100% accuracy. We even have formal languages to define parsers and RTL and stuff, that's how "mechanical" the whole process can be.
I'm pretty sure that any skilled compiler dev with the ISO C standard and a few packs of Red Bulls can apecode a working C compiler in a few days, give or take. The hard part isn't doing that, the hard part is the decades of iterative improvements to make it generate extremely performant yet correct code as fast as possible.
On the other hand, demeaning comments without any traces of constructive criticism don't have any value.
My partner does that as well as LLMs at this point; "Sure honey, I remember you've talked a lot about Rust and about Clojure in the past, and you seem excited about this Clojure-To-Rust transpiler you're building, it sounds like a great idea!", is that bad too?
This is just another way to throw binaries over the wire, but much worse. This has the _worst_ qualities of the GPL _and_ pseudo-free-software-licenses (i.e. the EULAs used by mongo and others). It has all the deceptive qualities of the latter (e.g. we are open but not really -- similar to Sun Microsystems [love this company btw, in spite of its blunders], trying to convince people that NeWS is "free" but that the cost of media [the CD-ROM] is $900), with the viral qualities of the former (e.g. the fruit of the poison tree problem -- if you use this in your code, then not only can you not copyright the code, but you might actually be liable for infringement of copyright and/or patents).
I would appreciate it if the contributor, mrconter11, would treat HN as an internet space filled with intelligent thinking people, and not a bunch of shallow and mindless rubes. (Please (1) explicitly disclose both the use and absence of use of LLMs -- people are more likely to use your software this way, and preserves the integrity of the open source ecosystem, and (2) share you prompts and session).
So passes the glory of open source.
https://github.com/mrconter1/IntuitiveEngine
> A simple 3D engine made only with 2D drawLine functions.
Not sure if it was meant as a joke or not, but this cracked me up
These days it can be almost as strict as you want it to be, but it’s always been a “loose” enough language that you can implement things that work in very fragile ways and iterate at incredible speed.
When I am designing PoC microservices that will eventually end up running as Go or Rust, I often start with a prototype in PHP.
Searching the term on DDG return this very page as the only result, I can confirm it's not a common term/meme.
We're living on a dead Internet are we?
If you think two people making the exact same comment about "Claude Max" (not even just Claude, specifically bringing up the $200 subscription) on an unrelated post is organic, I don't know what to tell you.