> "$PROJECT bans AI" is just ridiculous

why so? If they don't feel like reviewing code (or ensure copyright compliance) they are free to reject that.

If you feel strong about it, go fork and maintain it on your own.

>reviewed by humans can be perfectly good, maintainable, and indistinguishable from regular old code

That depends on the 'regular old code' but most stuff I have seen doesn't come close to 'maintainable'. The amount of cruft is proper.

Another good example of "the people writing good code with AI are the people who could have done it regardless"

Generally if I see 'this' to refer to some unknown part in any title, I'd consider it low quality.

Agreed, it's subtle but it's definitely a form of clickbait-style writing.

trucks? Or they still considered cars?

which part would you consider overengineered?

realistically the only part at half a gb/s I'd care is latency. Latency is a lot more important than the throughput.

I read the article before the abbreviate definition inclusion as its very opening. I had never met the abbreviation before.

It'd be quite surprising the WITH statement in top a query to be the first feature to learn/use past basic SQL. Is it personal experience in some industry?

According to the article that's what 25% of people think.

That's java code, though... bit weird, esp. i % 8 (which is just i & 7). The compiler should be able to optimize it since 'i' is guaranteed to be non-negative, still awkward.

Java CRC32 nowadays uses intrinsics and avx128 for crc32.

Crc32 can be written in handful lines of code. Although it'd be better to use the vector instruction set - e.g. AVX when available.