3 ms·
Read the article, these type of algorithms have an easy time with syntax. The real issue is that the code produced is meaningless.
by woah 10y ago
Read the article, these type of algorithms have an easy time with syntax. The real issue is that the code produced is meaningless.
- kordless 10y ago> The real issue is that the code produced is meaningless. Sounds like something I'd code up.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- dasboth 10y agoExactly, the difficulty is not really in producing valid code but meaningful code. Same with text generation - while a recurrent neural network might produce grammatically correct sentences, I don't think we're close to it producing an story with an actual plot, discernible characters etc.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- iandanforth 10y agoWhat about a statically analyzable language? That could be factored into the loss function.
- king_phil 10y agoI was thinking the same. Not only that, if you would add multiple networks that, for example, weigh the possibility that a full line is "good" code, and another that evaluates a whole block (like google deep mind did with AlphaGo) so it looks like dense and complex code this could be a nice program trolling with pull requests on github :-D