Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48866724

Points: 2

# Comments: 0

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48853618

Points: 3

# Comments: 0

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48756422

Points: 4

# Comments: 0

It can feel super useful as an engineer to find a line of code in PR or a sentence in a Notion document, and then add your feedback directly there. But then I find the conversation half happens on Slack, and then continues in a Zoom meeting, and then the comment on the Notion doc is out of date. So I have to keep track of all of this in my head with which piece of feedback is stale and which one is still relevant, and then reconcile that with feedback from others.

It’s assumed that we need another tool, something that can do the job of retrieving all of these comments and reconciling them into a total order. My article asks whether reconciling decisions into a total order is actually part of the job of leadership. If we defer to AI to make sense of what we’re saying and deciding then we risk the people and the org becoming weaker from lack of clarity.

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48638850

Points: 39

# Comments: 4

Full test coverage doesn’t tell you if the tests behave correctly. So you could prompt an AI agent to write 100% test coverage where those tests could be exercising all code paths yet contribute 0% to the story of what the code does. You need human understanding of what the desired contract is that the tests check.

Imagine a contract lawyer who blindly signs any contract that they are given: they aren’t doing their job. They ought to have an idea in mind of what their client’s goals and limits are so they can determine if a given contract fulfils those needs.

Types are a declarative contract, so they can be a lighter yet more limited way to enforce a contract. The compiler can verify if all the declared types across the program agree with each other. This is especially helpful with refactoring, such as ensuring the adding a field has been rolled out everywhere.

Types aren’t to be just checked by the compiler, but checked by the human authors too. That’s why explicit type signatures are valuable, especially if they are kept intelligible. They encode the different variations in state and possible branching on that state. So you can whittle your types down as a way of whittling the solution down to be more focused. The problem in your head is reflected in the types, and any simplifications in the types then simplify the problem in your head, and any tests derived from that understanding.

Yes, accessibility is a key concern of mine, I’m keen to explore html-in-canvas as a way to have an accessibility tree combined with a rendered interaction.

I’m personally at a stage where React and CSS have pushed to DOM to extremes of complexity and difficultly in optimization that I desire simpler ARIA-based HTML combined with custom rendering. I’m hopeful that it will be easier to test, lighter for users, and faster for everyone.

Here’s an example of Sudoku running in WebAssembly (it was vibe coded in Zig) and then rendered to canvas. The interface between the wasm module and the browser is function calls for keyboard and mouse events, and then another that renders to a pixel buffer to copy to the canvas.

https://qip.dev/play-sudoku

And this approach also works for simple forms, such as a URL input that gets turned into a QR code. Again the interface is simple, here converted a URL into SVG markup. As you type in the input we call the WebAssembly render function again.

https://qip.dev/qr

The purpose of a scripting language was to make authoring easier, but now it’s mostly a middle layer. There’s still getting the investment of a great standard library to keep you on track, but if you pick parts to make modular wasm and which parts to use reliably, proven code you can find a good balance.

For qip I chose to use Golang as its standard library is batteries-included with fs & networking.

Then everything else is AI-coded wasm plugins.

https://github.com/royalicing/qip

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47960286

Points: 6

# Comments: 0

qip lets you write tiny WebAssembly modules in Zig or C and compose them together. The modules have a simple input -> output interface and cannot access anything else, no file system, no network, no env vars, not even the time. You chain modules together so the output of one becomes the input of another e.g. there’s a CommonMark module that converts to markdown-to-html. There’s a file-based router that lets you serve a website with these same modules.

I want these modules to be open and shared, so you can decide to have a `/view-source` page that lists all the wasm modules and all the source content (markdown, images, etc) and source code (zig, c). So you can choose to fork the ingredients of the qip website if you like: https://qip.dev/view-source

I chose wasm because it’s fast, runs anywhere (browser/server/native), and has a strong yet lightweight sandbox. I’m working on collaborative web hosting that I hope will bring back web 1.0 vibes.

https://github.com/royalicing/qip

Who gates access to the circle? Anthropic or existing circle members or some other governance? If you are outside the circle will you be certain to die from software diseases?

Having been impressed by LLMs but not believing the AGI hype, I now see how having access to an information generator could be so powerful. With the right information you can hack other information systems. Without access to the best information you may not be able to protect your own system.

I think we have found the moat for AI. The question is are you inside or outside the castle walls?