3 ms·
Drivel. A much more interesting consideration would be "Teaching Programming in the Age of Stack Overflow", which involves a well-established, gigantic resourc
by PaulDavisThe1st 3y ago
Drivel.
A much more interesting consideration would be "Teaching Programming in the Age of Stack Overflow", which involves a well-established, gigantic resource for in-the-trenches programmers that generally provides functional, peer-reviewed and expansively commented solutions to the most common and sometimes most interesting problems.
What programming will be like in an age where LLM's can correctly code is something we won't have any idea about for some time yet (if ever).
- VerminOctopus1 3y agoHuh? I have personally committed production code that was 100% generated by an LLM. Simply because the code was correct and written more quickly than I could have physically typed it out. Does that not count as correct code to you?
- PaulDavisThe1st 3y agoCongratulations on being the exception that proves the rule, or rather, the minority situation that is being used to preemptively make claims about a technology that are not yet (and may never be) true. I tried it on my/our project 600K LOC (C++), all open source and almost certainly in the training set. Not only could it not explain the questions I asked it correctly, its answers and generated code were absolute jibberish, the sort of thing that would lead to you likely firing the person who gave them to you.