3 ms·
Can't +1 enough. This is clearly the future, as the increasing popularity of type systems shows. As interesting as those systems may be, they have it exactly b
by qsort 4y ago
Can't +1 enough. This is clearly the future, as the increasing popularity of type systems shows.
As interesting as those systems may be, they have it exactly backwards. Don't let the computer generate code and have the human check it for correctness: let the human write code and have the computer check it for correctness.
- zozbot234 4y ago> let the human write code and have the computer check it for correctness. Isn't that pretty much what ML does?
- goatlover 4y agoHow would ML know what the correct code should be?
- kristjansson 4y agoThat’s exactly the inverse of copilot and LLM code generation. The computer generates the code, the human checks if it’s correct
- rmbyrro 4y agoI bet most humans won't check. See the mindset of the author: > ... I will not delve into the questions of code quality, security, legal & privacy issues, pricing, and others of similar character. ... Let’s just assume all this is sorted out and see what happens next.
- john_the_writer 4y agoActually both don't work. The human also needs to make sure the code does what the Ticket asked for. And sometimes not even what the Ticket asked for, but what the business and user want/need. Honestly writing code is such a small part of a dev's job. It's figuring out how to translate the human (often non-tech) requirements into code that is also in a way that's also looking at requests that haven't been made yet.