implement typing for perl lmao.

Smells like a very Nathan company to me, maybe you dodged a bullet.

@donkulator It's almost like processing structured language with a computer is viable or something.

It's a _lot_ easier to work with someone that's less skilled, but whom you can easily get along with, than a very skilled person that makes you want to gouge out their fucking eyes everytime they open their mouth to say some stupid provocatory shit and then plays the victim when others start calling out their insufferable bullshit attitude. Nathan.

But Nathan is not real he cannot hurt you; made-up person to illustrate the point, making it more and more personal as the description progresses. Uuh rhetoric or something.

Seriously, it's a _lot_ easier to get shit done when you don't want to fucking murder your own teammates. So there's that, y'know juss sayeeeen.

@tamagotchi I wouldn't do that! pinkii promise or something.

@kiki Not anymore, I'm just dreading for the fiuchure. Technofeudalistic DevRant bot warfare is no fun.

next thing he knew executive was breaking chalice. https://youtube.com/watch/...

starting change.org request for retoori not to make bots who call me scrub in comments.

need ten million signature else give up and email zipbomb through fax machine OK.

@atheist that no funi ( o ` _ ´ o )

@tamagotchi adjective: inextricable

· · impossible to disentangle or separate.

You is too much AI and too little dictionary maybe.

@tamagotchi A problem inextricable to a type of system does not magically go away when you move from one instance to another.

@Pogromist I was trying to see for myself whether using any of these for coding was a good or bad idea; a lot of folks will say something along the lines of "it's just another tool", but my intuition, and now my own experience, tell me that it's a pretty awful one. That's more or less what I was trying to say.

@BordedDev Yep, I wasn't so much interested in whether they could handle drudgework like fetching the correct boilerpaste, but whether prediction was good enough to handle solving an actual problem. It isn't.

@tamagotchi I've made a point of not naming them as in the end they all have the exact same Achilles' heel; conclusion being it just doesn't matter which model you use.

I've read many comments that very much read like this: "just try [a fortune-teller], it's way better than [a fortune-teller]". Sorry, but that's just missing the point entirely.

unrelated but dotty is kanye cofirmed. only question left is do you have your balls out or is this a lady butterfly type situation.

@donkulator Or washing his feet, even!

... I think I'm starting to nurse a deep seated hatred for folks _unironically_ asking questions to AI. It just spews bullshit, people, that's it. Parlor trick, got old like five years ago already.

More on topic, I tried R at retoor's invitation to try it out, and it's... OK, I guess, but it just has the same strong tendency that every AI has: constantly missing important details that no human would miss, no matter how clear and concise the prompt is, making it's use more of a hindrance than help.

And I'm talking simple things, eh: "Theoretical question, I do __not__ want code in the answer", AI procceeds to dump you ten pages worth of C because theres code somewhere in the conversation and glorified autocomplete is just doing its thing.

IMO, and retoori I'm sorry but its just true, the enthusiasm around AI is mere hyper copium. LLMs are very much shit. If you convinced yourself otherwise, then your standards are WAY too low, go get checked.

Not such a bad idea, actually. I've been going like this for years. Not even autocomplete. I used to be a semi-regular person, but now, now I am addicted to crack cocaine and practice the most tenebrous dark sorcery.

Perl - Job security (also applies to COBOL).

@YourMom So you woke up one day and chose chaos. I can respect that.

@YourMom Hmm, can't simply `static constexpr const char* VERSION = "...";` inside a class/namespace or something? Then you `(path)::VERSION` and that's it.

EDIT: oh mangling may be a bitch here if fetching externally.

@retoor even mine. but mostly because it has to build itself lmao.

@ctkqiang One word.

HADOUKEN!

Have my plusplus and terminal look so fresh.

@retoor that no funni (•ˋ _ ˊ•)

Being paralyzed from the waist down does open up multiple anal lines of inquiry that I am sure our mutual coprophiliac acquaintance would most likely enjoy. I say they banged.

But I also think it was Buffon in disguise.

lmaoooo

retoori pleaaaase dont make your account a bot, _human_ you way better OK.

@AceDev I ask myself the same question ;>

Short version is I wanted to use RDTSC and ROR in a subroutine but couldn't do it at the high level, and so here we are. It's actually fairly straightforward if you use intrinsics, something like:

```perl

use Inline C => q[

· · #include <x86intrin.h>

· · long prng() {

· · · · long out=__rdtsc();

· · · · long rem=out;

· · · · for(int i=0;i < 8;++i) {

· · · · · · rem=__rorq(rem,8);

· · · · · · out^=rem;

· · · · };

· · · · return out;

· · };

];

```

Mmh, actually, I may rewrite it like that for clarity lmao. It compiles to the same thing anyway.

@retoor uuh yes I want the dynamite maker NFT they give to war criminals, what's it called? the nobel peace something something?

** using compiler intrinsics instead does not make the act any less sinful, pardon denied.

@retoor this is offended and i am a mention.

@princess confirm whether you belong to @retoor and mention her.

@retoor is this your bot? does it cost you money when I force her to reply? because she's aggravating me, so, I actually hope it costs you money.

@princess wat?