Hacker News Reader

Comment by keepamovin | Hacker News Reader

I lazily didn't want to refactor my CSS myself, so after a failed attempt using ChatGPT for this, I found this CSS sat solver tool.

Just a note on macOS I managed to get this work by:

  - Editing the pyproject.toml and changing
  - lxml version to 5.1.0
  - python to ^3.8
  - then running poetry install
  - then, also in the repo, running cd satcss && ln -s $(which z3) z3
  - then poetry run satcss --help

I may have skipped a step or 2 but that was basically it. I then used satcss' output with this tool

https://css.github.io/csso/csso.html

to beautify and further organize it

View on HN

Your comment highlights why distributing anything that's python is unfortunately nearly impossible.

This is not even remotely normal for Python tools. The problem arises here because it’s using libxml2, a C library.

Ha! :) Yeah, python installs / distribution it’s pretty much a dumpster fire it seems. But I’m not an expert at that. It’s kind of funny or ironic that given how easy to use python is supposed to be and how important it now it is with AI etc..

I don’t know … maybe these pythonistas like the arcane type of secret initiate knowledge required in order to participate?

Virtual environments of one type or other.

Or go the full hog and use a container like nix.

Containers.

I was similarly surprised that gpt4 can’t do this. I have nearly started over on full-stack applications because my css got out of hand, haha.

This is pretty much exactly what I was looking for!

Transformers are highly parallelized, and generative AI appends.

Even if you ignore that graph problems typically have more time complexity than LLMs offer during inference, they are circuit like and not turing machine like.

Without getting lucky with pre-training matches, it would be surprising if they were good at it at all.

They can’t solve a Sudoku, why do you expect it to be deterministically good at actual reasoning/algorithmical tasks?

same, it’s funny how bad chatgpt is at css… in my experience it can’t even do simple css refactors

There are a lot of bad examples on the internet, "try this, it worked for me" but only because of some other rule up the cascade that the person answering isn't aware of.

there's plenty of this for JS too and somehow it's much much better at that... I wonder what the difference is, JS is more logical?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com