Yeah I know, but if you really mean that analogy then the conclusion is that the normal thing for 99% of programmers to do should be to use AI. In the same way that 99% of people do not get around by running.
I don't agree with that yet - so far I've found AI to be a very fast but mediocre programmer. Kind of like giving a beginner access to all the documentation and a time machine. Sometimes that's exactly what you want. But definitely not most of the time.
Not everyone that runs is an avid runner.
But I do feel like the analogies aren't that great. Coding in notepad instead of an IDE is dumb because IDEs work and don't really have any downsides. AI mostly seems to produce slop that barely works without a ton of cajoling.
modern C++ facilities do make a difference to prevalence of bugs.
This is true, but just saying "write modern C++!" doesn't actually work in practice. First, there are a ton of footguns that even best-practice C++ doesn't avoid. Using std::shared_ptr? Great, you're probably going to avoid memory leaks. Null pointer dereference? Not so much. What's the modern C++ way to avoid integer overflow?
Second, it's pretty much impossible to completely avoid raw pointers etc. even if you're trying, and good luck getting your colleagues to actually try. I can't even get mine to write proper commit messages. You need a machine forcing them to do it properly. Something they can't opt out of (or at least where opting out isn't the easy lazy option).
So yeah it's better to use modern C++ and it is an improvement, but not enough the change the conclusion that you should just use Rust instead.
Impressive transition. It's definitely better just to start with type annotations. It's around 3-10x more work to add them later, and you don't get the productivity benefits of having had them along the way. Same goes for Python.
Damn that's pretty good! (Outside the US I mean.)
Presumably this would be a bit higher actually since it's contract work, not full time.
8 GB is a really small amount. Even phones have had that much RAM for several years. The average desktop I built in 2012 had 16 GB of RAM.
Plenty of modern computers only come with a small amount of RAM, because most people only need a small amount, but 8 GB is still a small amount.
That is about their AI service. If you don't use that then who cares?
To be honest I suspect they wanted to do this before, but the power mods wouldn't allow it. I definitely remember the staff posting a proposal to allow second chances for closed questions, and it was downvoted to hell by the mods. They presumably got scared because they were getting a lot of free labour from the mods (even if it probably wasn't exactly the kind they wanted).
Now StackOverflow is dead the mods have no power, so they are free to make changes.
The company is going forward with it because the "active community" killed their site and now they have no choice.
If they had done it before AI became a viable alternative they might still have some users.
I would say it maybe makes sense to do that for team based projects so your TODOs don't impact other people finding new warnings in their code.
For solo projects I don't think that makes any sense.
It's better than nothing but it really only drags Bash from "your code is definitely horribly broken" to "your code is probably broken". Nothing like Rust!