> So you could presumably also set it up to implement its suggestions (i.e. if it "executes" its proposed definition for `succ` that would actually just update it in the global namespace). Fun stuff.
Yep, I've had that working in some earlier version of the tooling.
> I'd suggest rethinking this; people usually expect the tab key to auto-complete.
That's a fair point.
> At any rate, thanks for writing the description yourself.
I might let an LLM write the code, and even the user's manual, but I write my own blog post and comments. :-)
Same here!
I am now actually working in compilers, which is one thing I'm really passionate about, but not something I was doing professionaly. I managed to turn a toy project and some blog posts into an actual job at almost 40, so, thank you HN!
I work at ServiceNow, which sells an enterprise platform and a ton of products built on top of it.
Internal teams and customers can extend the platform by writing JavaScript, hence we have a JS runtime in the platform (the venerable https://github.com/mozilla/rhino/), which our team works on.
from gremllm import Gremllm
# Be sure to tell your gremllm what sort of thing it is
counter = Gremllm('counter')
counter.value = 5
counter.increment()
print(counter.value) # 6?
print(counter.to_roman_numerals()) # VI?
Of course I didn't assume to be 100% productive immediately, and I did spend a few weeks on this experiment, not just some days.
My point was more about how even modern C++ felt (to me) dated and annoying to use compared to more modern language, because of the strong (but very valid!) focus on backward compatibility that C++ has. Furthermore, the long history and baggage means that for any thing, there are _many_ different ways of doing it, which doesn't help.
And anyway, it was not a particularly serious (or, for that matter, well written or argued) discussion. As I mentioned in literally the first line, it's just a rant :-)
PS: I am unsure what you mean with "relying on LLM for configuring things says it all". In my experience, this is one area where LLMs _really_ do help a lot - it has been much faster than going through the documentation (which I also did quite a bit of, in particular for conan).
That sounds reasonable (and way better than what I have implemented).
I am not sure I am going to try it though - it probably is a bit too much code to change for something that I consider "done" and I am not working on. :)
Yep, I've had that working in some earlier version of the tooling.
> I'd suggest rethinking this; people usually expect the tab key to auto-complete.
That's a fair point.
> At any rate, thanks for writing the description yourself.
I might let an LLM write the code, and even the user's manual, but I write my own blog post and comments. :-)