/g/ - Technology

So for the last few days I had been studying how compilers work - reading the whole theory and stuff.

Turns out compilers are just translators to platform specific assembly kek, like literally the code you write in a high level language gets tokenized into the most fundamental meaningful units and then gets translated into assembly, apart from some conditional expansion and prologue addition, that's mostly it.

Coders are such lazynibbas yaar, I used to have completely different image of compilers in my head, I can't really express in words what it was but still, I feel cheated for some reason.

If you think about it these LLMs are just Compiler 2.0, this time we translate English to a High level programming language, which is already English with some more logic and some math.

People crying about Programming getting automated, if you actually study the theory and history, you will realise that, this has been the goal all along.

Compiler was just LLM 1.0

>>753(OP)

You don't read to read a book to know that compiler converts a high level language to low level language

LLMs are not 2.0 anything

A compiler is a deterministic finite automaton

LLMs are non deterministic next token predictors

A compiler will always generate the same output

While a LLM will always give a different output

>>753(OP)

Kek. When you code in a compiled language, you're actually giving instructions to the compiler, not to the computer.

>>759

Even in assembly you are mostly instructing the OS

I have written some basic Apple silicon assembly just for learning purposes.

>>756

>picrel

i hate onions

>>761

That too. I remember in an interview, they asked me what gives segmentation fault error. I got confused a bit but remembered that it is the OS.

Most of the time, the program is making syscalls that have to go through OS anyway.