4 ms·
I'm sure you generate all your serialization code by hand. Not to mention the object model. Why let compiler make a virtual call if you can load the class point
by lostmsu 3y ago
I'm sure you generate all your serialization code by hand. Not to mention the object model. Why let compiler make a virtual call if you can load the class pointer and look up the right function yourself, MIRIGHT?
- jononor 3y agoSerialization code should be generic, no boilerplate needed. Object models must reflect the problem domain well, something to think carefully about. Current code assistants is only able to do that automatically for very generic classes.
- hn92726819 3y ago> I'm sure you generate all your serialization code by hand. Is this sarcasm? Who generates serialization/deserialization by hand now? Even Java has mature annotation libraries so it can be done in a single line. Maybe legacy code, but I'd argue using IDE method generation would be much preferred on a legacy codebase than AI.
- pavlov 3y agoBut that’s the whole point of what I meant by “I should be working on something higher level.” Nobody (hopefully) uses an LLM to write mounds of x86 assembly code instead of letting the compiler do it. An AI model is a very blunt tool for most jobs. If I need code generation, most often I should write my own tool for it rather than copy-paste reams of barely inspected code from a language model.