7 ms·
Object-oriented languages provide little value because a programmer’s job is to think Memory-safe languages provide little value because a programmer’s job is
by lobochrome 1y ago
Object-oriented languages provide little value because a programmer’s job is to think
Memory-safe languages provide little value because a programmer’s job is to think
…
- DidYaWipe 1y agoNot comparable at all.
- ahartmetz 1y agoNow this isn't a killer argument, but your examples are about readability and safety, respectively - the quality of the result. LLMs seem to be more about shoveling the same or worse crap faster.
- dymk 1y agoHave you tried an AI coding assistant, or is that just the impression you get?
- ahartmetz 1y agoI have seen the results of other people. Code LLMs seem to do some annoying stuff more quickly than manually and are sometimes able to improve prose in comments and such. But they also mess up when it gets moderately difficult, especially when there are "long distance" connections between pieces. That and the probably seductive (to some) ability to crank out working, but repetitive or partially nonsensical code, is what I call shoveling crap faster.
- dymk 1y agoI dunno what to tell you, I am able to get consistently good quality work out of eg 3.7 sonnet and it’d saved me a ton of time. Garbage in garbage out, maybe the people you’ve observed don’t know how to write good prompts.
- ahartmetz 1y agoI guess I should play around with that one then. My general impression was that we're already in the diminishing returns part of the sigmoid curve (calendar time or coefficient array size vs quality) for LLMs, until there's maybe a change other than making them bigger.
- skydhash 1y agoUsing deterministic methods as counter arguments about a probabilistic one. Something apples, something oranges….