The essential work of is building the theory of the problem + solution. Theory then enables creation of working code. In the end, the code is necessary, but it is not sufficient. Theory is indispensable. (cf. Peter Naur, 1985)
Any conversation
I never have enough time but Iโd love to do a bit more recreational programming with esoterical languages like kitten, , and . AoC and Project Euler are good because they just require an answer but thereโs also loads of simple puzzles online that rely on being able to submit the code in common languages. Iโve been wondering, however, if I could use an LLM to take those problems and create a verification harness for any language I like.
"200K lines is not 10 times as much as 20K lines - from the mission perspective it's just irrelevant. And yet it's the easiest thing to measure. And so we look for the keys under the lamp post." ~Kent Beck
www.youtube.com/watch?v=F8fBgDCf2Y4&t=2753s
Vagyis attรณl mรฉg, hogy trehรกny vagyok, mรฉg mลฑkรถdhetne jobban is az anyagmegmaradรกs tรถrvรฉnye, mint รฉppen errefelรฉ, vagyis errefelรฉ plรกne mลฑkรถdnie kellene, mรฉgsem ezt teszi.
So even though I'm clumsy, the law of conservation of matter could still work better than it does here, or rather, it shouldn't work here, but it doesn't.
Sunk cost fallacy is no longer applicable in the age of . Now you can do broad changes without second thought, u can always revert back, without incurring the cost of doing so, since itโs all done so quickly and effortlessly.

