"The earlier implementation could not be driven to zero of them, because boxing was load-bearing in its emitter"

In the docs of the repo of their TS to C++ compiler. https://github.com/geastack/compiler

I see what you’re getting at, but let’s not pretend like “load-bearing” is something that AIs made up. It was a turn of phrase long before AIs became mainstream and people are still allowed to use it.

"geatsc: the GeaStack TypeScript-to-C++ compiler. A clean-room rewrite built on one rule — a statically typed value that reaches a dynamic carrier is a defect, not a fallback."

The whole thing is like this

But to be fair, it's late 2026 so it's to be expected now that the vast majority of code and surrounding artifacts are AI generated. It's just a fact of life.

Heh, we spent 6 months writing and rewriting the compiler a couple of times and were just too excited about the final architecture. Thank you, simplified.

What do you mean? You were so excited that you didn't want to talk about what excited you and left it to an LLM instead?

I think there was a lot more brainpower invested in the media generation side of things. The noise-based diffusion technique is further developed. It had a discovery of applying a physics-based understanding of Brownian motion to guide it. Image generation has comparatively simple training process - this is an image with dog, and without dog (contrastive learning).

Might be worth to watch the diffusion based LLMs.

That's just https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unsharp_masking and has been around since decades.

After you clamped the stem, the preload job of the cap is done and it can be replaced.

Mm. Yes, but I wouldn't trust that.

Had to remember how ads looked like when Flash was popular. We had fullscreen ads that interacted with the content!

Interactive Flash Banner Ads Animation from the 2000s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w0Lu8BsjvK0

I am surprised by the rather bad output. It doesn't achieve qwen image 1 quality in composition or anatomical correctness. Tested on chat.qwen.ai

I am seeing third legs and glowing eyes. It's a Microsoft Lens level of quality and that one was pulled.

Contrary to that. The saying - Better to have a bad abstraction than none - was born from spaghetti code pain.

They really did their best comparing it with other tools here https://docs.deno.com/runtime/desktop/comparison/

RE: Tauri not having cross-compile... There's a GitHub action that compiles for Linux, Windows, and Mac. So practically it does have it, just not out of the box.

Practically that's just the ability to generate binaries for more than one target. "Cross compiling" is specifically that ability without having to invoke a separate external environment to get the additional targets.

If cross compiling were really just about the result rather than the means, what would the difference be between that and normal support for multiple targets?

Apple has some clever mechanics to protect user data. I had to work with App tracking stuff lately and their approach to keeping user details private with anonymized cohorts (SKAN, Differential Privacy) before reporting tracking events to third party platforms was surprisingly well thought out. There is value in having them in your loop if you care about privacy.

My read of the ATT stuff is basically that it forced all the apps to use meta ad tracking because they’re the only ones who figured out how to serve relevant ads despite it.

Figured out = do the forbidden PII join anyway with their partners in “clean rooms”.

Right, the lesson here is that if you make rules with exploitable loopholes youre probably only going to end up strengthening malicious actors who are willing to exploit loopholes.

It would be cool if they offered some kind of prompt sanitation option.