Much like contracts--yes, C++ needs something modules-like, but the actual design as standardized is not usable.

Once big companies like Google started pulling out of the committee, they lost their connection to reality and now they're standardizing things that either can't be implemented or no one wants as specced.

Right, I think the tension here is that we would like contracts to exist in the language, but the current design isn't what it needs to be, and once it's standardized, it's extremely hard to fix.

It does sound like a very Intel choice though.

Didn't work for me. I had a package marked delivered that never showed. The AI initiated a return process (but I didn't have anything to return). I needed to escalate to a human.

Yeah, but consumers can't buy Waymos. They can get dangerously unsafe Teslas and pretend it's the same tech.

Is there a way to measure users "making the best choice?" You could measure the amount of time spent comparison-shopping, but most people are terrible at that anyway; it's an acquired skill for sure. Besides a willingness to spend time, it seems like an impossible-to-quantify metric even in the abstract.

Maybe the best proxy metric is whether the customer returns the product. But the store will also be willing to eat more returns on a higher margin item if they make more profit at the end of the day.

I don't think I agree. If I overpay by 10%, I'll never know it and probably wouldn't return it even if I did know--once the shrinkwrap is off, too late. If a superior product exists but I don't find it, by definition I wouldn't know and wouldn't return the thing I did buy.

Cynically, the customer might not know if they overpaid but the retailer doesn’t care about that. Where “making the best choice” actually cashes out is the customer DAU dropping (rare) or product returns increasing.

What are you talking about? In Cocoa if you want a button you drag one in via Interface Builder. You don't even need to write any code. If you want it to do something, you type the name of the function it should call.

American safety standards require that the car be more-or-less entirely functional without the infotainment system.

On my Renault Megane e-Tech, the Android infotainment system sometimes requires a reboot while driving. If I have the route visualized on the instrument cluster screen, that stays working fine while the infotainment reboots.

So clearly entirely separate systems, despite it is obviously also running Google maps to show the route. Presumably this is quite common.

Well we're talking about a Chinese-made car purchased and driven in Germany, so I'm not sure what American safety standards have to do with the situation...

Cars which are built to sell into the US market (Japanese and European) all follow these regulations. If the EU has similar laws, then a Chinese car that sells into the EU would need to follow the same rules here, but I don't know enough about EU safety regulations to be sure.

Not all games are DX12 though.

Emulating DX11 and below, as well as OpenGL, using Vulkan does not confer any performance benefits. In fact, it’s really hard to surpass them that way.

The performance benefits of Vulkan and DX12 come from tighter control over the hardware by the engine. An engine written for older APIs needs to be adapted to gain anything.

It's vibe code all the way down!