←back to thread

194 points todsacerdoti | 2 comments | | HN request time: 0.44s | source
Show context
idlip ◴[] No.44573461[source]
Its nice read. We need more of comparative posts by user familiar with both nix and guix.

We see bias with most discussions.

Only cons with Guix I see is, lack of infrastructure and less volunteers to work on guix eco-system. If its solved, I can imagine guix can improve exponentially.

replies(4): >>44607020 #>>44607098 #>>44608492 #>>44609855 #
exe34 ◴[] No.44609855[source]
Would it be possible to automate nix->guix for packages? A lot of nix packages (e.g. python) I think are handled automatically. If guix could build on that huge package repo, it would really help.
replies(1): >>44611244 #
amelius ◴[] No.44611244[source]
I suppose an LLM could easily translate the build scripts. It will not be perfect, but probably will save a lot of work.
replies(1): >>44611695 #
1. evolve2k ◴[] No.44611695[source]
I can’t find the quote right now; but it’s along the lines. LLM’s can help with the first 80% of coding which is introducing bugs, but terrible at the other 80% of the time which is removing said bugs.

Lean and agile theory says that quality is improved and efficiency gained by going upstream and eliminating the things that are producing poor quality in the first place.

Llm code tools may be useful to give syntax tips, but like a thoughtless dev on a team, likely introduce more work than they get done.

replies(1): >>44615308 #
2. exe34 ◴[] No.44615308[source]
The thing about chatgpt/cursor is that they seem very good at fixing things if they have verbose errors - and nix is very verbose about what it hates in your config. I've given errors to chatgpt and it fixed it for me. With cursor, I had something displaying in a really weird way (plotting a map in js), and I gave it a screenshot and it fixed it immediately.

I would never use llm code in prod without understanding it, but for one-off utilities it has been really great so far.