3 ms·

I don't know if OP meant "trust" as in free from security errors or bugs. I often struggle with "how is this a useful tool?". Fixing bugs in someone else's code

I don't know if OP meant "trust" as in free from security errors or bugs. I often struggle with "how is this a useful tool?". Fixing bugs in someone else's code seems like more a time sink than just writing the code myself. I assume everyone else must be working on projects/languages that have far more representation in the training set, but for me, especially working in Rust, even trying to write interfaces into C libraries, I would constantly find myself dealing with hallucinated parameters or function calls, incorrectly implemented functions or just broken code. At the very least if I do it myself, I'll have some intuition about how the code works.

mindcrime 2y ago
> I assume everyone else must be working on projects/languages that have far more representation in the training set, I can't speak for anyone else, but I've used LLM's mainly for generating Java code. The generated code hasn't necessarily ever been perfect, but IME it's been "close enough" that even counting having to make some manual changes, it's still faster than writing it myself from scratch. That said, I'm typically only using it for relatively short snippets of code, where I "know" how to do the operation in question, but want to avoid having to stop and look up fiddly details that might not be cached "top of mind" because I haven't written that code in a while. I'm sure there are use-cases where LLM's don't save time, but I'm equally sure that there are at least some where they do.