"Holds up"
"not a toy, but not a sprawling project either, and ideally.."
"And that’s the trap"
ctrl F "real" -> 6 usages
ctrl F "genuine" -> 4 usages
"Rust: this exact shape can’t compile."
And even if LLMs didn’t exist (or had different idiosyncrasies), the article would still be exhibiting a repeatedly weird and stilted writing style.
> Disclaimer: styling and error handling throughout this article were cleaned up with the help of AI.
The implication seems to be "light editing", but the LLM styling really comes through, so I guess that tracks.
In this case it feels AI generated with human polish, or vice versa. A couple tells are "One caveat worth stating up front..." and of course, "...the shape of the language itself...".
I actually think this might be a good thing? I'm way more aware of cliches and filler in my writing these days, and it almost always reads better when I just remove them and plainly say the thing.
Is that what they said? If that's not what they said, why are you putting words in their mouth in an attempt to weaken their statement into some completely ridiculous stupid strawman that is obviously not actually what they said?
this isn't true and hasn't been true for a while
> I didn’t put words into anyones mouth
literally read your first sentence again, and notice the word "others"