zlacker

[parent] [thread] 6 comments
1. signat+(OP)[view] [source] 2026-02-04 13:26:35
> They obey a specification developers know

Which spec? Is there a spec that says if you use a particular set of libraries you’d get less than 10 millisecond response? You can’t even know that for sure if you roll your own code, with no 3rd party libraries.

Bugs are by definition issues arise when developers expect they code to do one thing, but it does another thing, because of unforeseen combination of factors. Yet we all are ok with that. That’s why we accept AI code. They work well enough.

replies(2): >>skydha+6p >>Krssst+sX3
2. skydha+6p[view] [source] 2026-02-04 15:36:35
>>signat+(OP)
> Is there a spec that says if you use a particular set of libraries you’d get less than 10 millisecond response?

There can be. But you’d have to map the libraries to opcodes and then count the cycles. That’s what people do when they care about that particular optimization. They measure and make guaranties.

replies(1): >>raw_an+a91
◧◩
3. raw_an+a91[view] [source] [discussion] 2026-02-04 18:52:57
>>skydha+6p
That’s not realistic with any processor that does branch prediction, cache hits vs cache misses etc
replies(1): >>skydha+ow1
◧◩◪
4. skydha+ow1[view] [source] [discussion] 2026-02-04 20:42:04
>>raw_an+a91
You can easily compute the worst cases. All the details are in the specs of the processor.
replies(1): >>raw_an+gE1
◧◩◪◨
5. raw_an+gE1[view] [source] [discussion] 2026-02-04 21:16:35
>>skydha+ow1
Assuming also that you are not running on top of an operating system, running in a VM with “noisy neighbors”…

I haven’t counted cycles since programming assembly on a 65C02 where you cooks save a clock cycle by accessing memory in the first page of memory - two opcodes to do LDA $02 instead of LDA $0201

replies(1): >>skydha+KO1
◧◩◪◨⬒
6. skydha+KO1[view] [source] [discussion] 2026-02-04 22:10:16
>>raw_an+gE1
Then assumes the opposite. Build an RTOS and don’t virtualize your software on top of it.
7. Krssst+sX3[view] [source] 2026-02-05 15:33:59
>>signat+(OP)
For compilers: the C++ standard.

For OSes: POSIX, or the MSDN documentation for Windows.

Compiler bugs and OS bugs are extremely rare so we can rely on them to follow their spec.

AI bugs are very much expected when the "spec" (the prompt) is correct, and since the prompt is written using imprecise human language likely by people that are not used to writing precise specifications, the prompt is likely either mistaken or insufficiently specified.

[go to top]