A simple "/goal analyze this codebase, assign names for each function, and creates named structs for parameters." works well, even with quite weak agents. Remember, parsing through heaps of text is their forte!

This setup also works for more exotic non-x86 architectures with more dynamic code loading, like PS2, N64, etc.

And why rely on someone else's software for this in 2026? I vibecoded a Rust+Starlark zigbee hub software that uses a few MB of RAM on my router and can directly dispatch HTTP for alerting, as well as exposing prometheus metrics. Zigbee2MQTT apparently wants several hundred MB of RAM.

For passive monitoring, I have six water leak sensors and two temperature/humidity sensors.

The crucial thing is that I can fix it if it breaks. I can debug the low level network packets, support whatever hardware I want, and not have to rely on someone else's cloud ecosystem.

It's great!

But this isn't raw Gale-Shapley-- the participants aren't ranking all hundreds/thousands of others. In particular, the preference matrix is based on identical mutual compatibility scores, so there's a unique stable solution (not multiple stable ones!), and there's no "side" that benefits, since the solution is identical no matter who does the "proposing".

> The AST rewrite creates multiple specialized copies of functions, variables, and types that mention simd types, where simd types are replaced with references to size-specialized types in simd/internal/bridge. Each of these bridge types is defined as an archsimd type, but with a restricted set of methods. The specialized functions, variables, and types acquire a suffix of the form @simdNNN, where NNN is either a vector length (128, 256, or 512) or 0, indicating emulation. Functions that mention simd internally, but not in their signature, are converted to wrappers that switch on the SIMD level detected at program start, and call the appropriate specialized version of that function. Specialized functions call other specialized functions directly without dispatch overhead (and perhaps with inlining). This rewrite strategy was chosen as a compromise between code duplication and SIMD performance; the overhead is hoisted as high as necessary to avoid dispatch within SIMD computations, but not higher. If SIMD dispatch appears “too low” in a computation, a gratuitous mention of a simd type will move it upwards, as in this example:

   Model                            Correct tool shape    Exact arguments
  ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━  ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━  ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
   FunctionGemma fine-tune, BF16       209/230 (90.9%)    196/230 (85.2%)
  ───────────────────────────────  ────────────────────  ─────────────────
   Needle 3 fine-tuned W4A8             74/230 (32.2%)     47/230 (20.4%)
  ───────────────────────────────  ────────────────────  ─────────────────
   Needle 2 fine-tuned W4               59/230 (25.7%)     43/230 (18.7%)

> The dataset contains about 200 hours of paired audio and MIDI recordings from ten years of International Piano-e-Competition. The MIDI data includes key strike velocities and sustain/sostenuto/una corda pedal positions. Audio and MIDI files are aligned with ∼3 ms accuracy and sliced to individual musical pieces, which are annotated with composer, title, and year of performance. Uncompressed audio is of CD quality or higher (44.1–48 kHz 16-bit PCM stereo).

This also makes it much harder to monitor its reasoning.

Safari appears to be the only shipping browser using hardware decoding for JPEG and HEIF (HEVC based images). This is probably because vertical integration lets them make the decoders appropriate for image use.

Also, "AVIF video" is incorrect. AVIF is the image codec based on AV1 intra frames.

- "I want a language that works a little differently"

- programming language theory (PLT), generally

- languages are tools. the authors should explain what their languages are best suited for

- Obj C and C++ were both developed around the same time as extensions of C. Obj C was focused on message passing and Smalltalk's object system, while C++ was focused on adding as many abstractions as possible to C. Neither language has good support for avoiding null pointer dereferences, one of the primary things Swift addresses with its richer type system and Optionals.