3 ms·

> You have to explain to the LLM exactly what it is that you want it to do to get the right result, then it gives you a solution. Mostly the solution is right,

> You have to explain to the LLM exactly what it is that you want it to do to get the right result, then it gives you a solution. Mostly the solution is right, but when it's wrong you'll better understand the problem through the act of writing it out. The solution is either correct or incorrect. In general its level of incorrectness is not trivial. My language of choice is C#. Anytime I ask it to generate a series of classes (say a data model of a particular domain, using specific well-known patterns), it gets it wrong, quite wrong and it would take more effort to explain it to unfuck itself, by which time it would have forgotten 3 deliberate instructions from 5 interactions ago. It’s a brilliant moron.

kamaal 2y ago
>>The solution is either correct or incorrect. Not even humans write 100% correct solutions. Everyday programming is not a theorem proving exercise. Programs are correct enough, to cover a agreeable amount of test cases. >>Anytime I ask it to generate a series of classes Generating a class is too big and broad of question to ask an LLM to generate. My chunks of inputs and outputs to/from an LLM are often on the lines of a single for loop, if block or a small chunk of code that can't be written in more than one way. There are several steps from here to a complete class. LLM is your classic socratic thinking tool. You really to have to learn to ask and work in chunks of questions that are smallest, and involve only one change from the previous question, and are atomic enough to do a easy roll back. And you need to build from here. As experience with the series of books The Little Schemer shows, this unfortunately is not everyone's cup of tea. A lot of people struggle to keep a train of thought in their minds and work in that workflow. To that extent I see LLM are not for everyone. Just like how Google search was great and helped a lot of people, but the majority just couldn't bring themselves to sit in front of a screen and work for hours stitching solutions from various places on internet into a working solution.

kamaal 2y ago

>>The solution is either correct or incorrect. Not even humans write 100% correct solutions. Everyday programming is not a theorem proving exercise. Programs are correct enough, to cover a agreeable amount of test cases. >>Anytime I ask it to generate a series of classes Generating a class is too big and broad of question to ask an LLM to generate. My chunks of inputs and outputs to/from an LLM are often on the lines of a single for loop, if block or a small chunk of code that can't be written in more than one way. There are several steps from here to a complete class. LLM is your classic socratic thinking tool. You really to have to learn to ask and work in chunks of questions that are smallest, and involve only one change from the previous question, and are atomic enough to do a easy roll back. And you need to build from here. As experience with the series of books The Little Schemer shows, this unfortunately is not everyone's cup of tea. A lot of people struggle to keep a train of thought in their minds and work in that workflow. To that extent I see LLM are not for everyone. Just like how Google search was great and helped a lot of people, but the majority just couldn't bring themselves to sit in front of a screen and work for hours stitching solutions from various places on internet into a working solution.