Is the use of the term "automatic programming" a deliberate parallel to the development of COBOL [1]?

If so, if this is meant to imply that LLMs are just another step towards higher-level abstractions, the analogy doesn't quite work. Unlike a COBOL compiler, the LLMs output can't be predicted or reasoned about, so you can't really fix bugs in your program (i.e. your prompt) but only try to permute it haphazardly and hope for the best.

[1] https://ethw.org/Milestones:A-0_Compiler_and_Initial_Develop...

> For every single update, for all your AUR packages, all the time.

Yes, that's what I used to do when I ran Arch. It's usually easy. The PKGBUILD is usually small to begin with and the difference for a new version should normally be something like the URL and the version number and not much else, so you can just diff it against the old version.

paru presents all pkgbuild diffs to you before installing, that's what I use to read them.

I usually only use AUR to install trusted pre-compiled binary packages, the scripts are very simple and the only thing that should ever change is the url and the sha256

Yea, paru makes it really easy, i noticed the diffs are a little easier/different versus yay. Not sure though if it's a config setting, haven't figured out the details yet.

Also paru shows you coloured code syntax if you have `bat` installed, i think.

I do it too, but I can see why this can be a problem for users. There should be an "official" scan for potentially malicious changes. I use a third party AUR scanner to help me with this.

What third party scanner do you use?

In particular (as I just learned when looking it up), WASM can dynamically allocate host memory with the memory.grow instruction, so you don't have to waste a huge chunk of statically allocated memory per VM: https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/WebAssembly/Referen...

Although... it doesn't say anything about releasing memory back to the host (I don't see a memory.shrink instruction) so maybe it's not all that helpful? Will WASM applications continue hogging the maximum amount of memory they've ever used until they're restarted?

A VM could release memory back to the host using memory ballooning, but this has to be managed manually somehow, at least with QEMU.

From the introduction section of the Java specification [1]:

"The Java Virtual Machine is the cornerstone of the Java platform. It is the component of the technology responsible for its hardware- and operating system-independence, the small size of its compiled code, and its ability to protect users from malicious programs."

[1] https://docs.oracle.com/javase/specs/jvms/se26/html/jvms-1.h...

There are (or have been) lots of languages using the JVM as a compilation target, whether it is well-suited for this or not. Wikipedia has a partial list: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_JVM_languages

My point is that it isn't well suited for it. Hence WASM.

Function definitions in Python are just statements that are executed. When you execute the "def" statement, the default values are evaluated.

You can try it in the REPL:

  >>> def f(foo=print("Executing def statement!")):
  ...   print("Executing function body.")
  ... 
  Executing def statement!
  >>> f()
  Executing function body.

There's a fairly straight-forward explanation of this in the documentation: https://docs.python.org/3/reference/compound_stmts.html#func...

"Default parameter values are evaluated from left to right when the function definition is executed. This means that the expression is evaluated once, when the function is defined, and that the same “pre-computed” value is used for each call."

I don't see a disconnect. AI generates things that are similar to existing things (but partly made up and subtly wrong), so just like how it can generate somewhat correct code it can also generate somewhat correct vulnerability reports.

Who is going to pay for maintaining the massively more complicated implementation though? Microsoft pulled their funding of the Python team, and even if they hadn't I think there's a danger in making Python so complicated that it can no longer be maintained without the backing of some giant corporation.

Maybe it's more like shift-left testing [1]? You're trying to move some checks to earlier in the process, if I understood you correctly, and get cheaper feedback loops.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shift-left_testing

Test Driven Development. There's more than several /tdd skills that are popular.

FreeBSD has a "protect" command which does something similar to what this asks for – the man page [1] describes it:

"The protect command is used to mark processes as protected. The kernel does not kill protected processes when swap space is exhausted. [...] If you protect a runaway process that allocates all memory the system will deadlock."

[1] https://man.freebsd.org/cgi/man.cgi?query=protect&apropos=0&...

Are those Google ads? That's the only ad-related script I can find on the page. One of the ads says it comes from "MediaGo", but the iframe seems to be served from googlesyndication.com.

If so, I'm glad we have such a trustworthy company keeping Android users safe from malware by preventing us from installing our own software, all for our own good.