3 ms·
Are there any other programming languages that are inherently as imprecise as prompting an LLM? From my knowledge, there isn't, and that seems to be a fundament
by esperent 2y ago
Are there any other programming languages that are inherently as imprecise as prompting an LLM? From my knowledge, there isn't, and that seems to be a fundamental diff between prompts and code.
- skirge 2y ago"Take EXPLOR, for example: here is a programming language with probabilistic execution (every instruction specifies the probability with which it should be executed) and no variables -- every instruction operates on either the screen image or other instructions" https://esolangs.org/wiki/Prehistory_of_esoteric_programming_languages https://esolangs.org/wiki/Prehistory_of_esoteric_programming...
- esperent 2y agoThanks for sharing, that was an interesting read. > every instruction specifies the probability with which it should be executed Is this still precise, in a way that prompting llms isn't? I'd need to explore the language in more depth to answer that, but if it does what I assume which is basically a string of instructions like do x with probability y, then it's still precise, except we're using probability theory in addition to/instead of standard programming logic.
- gus_massa 2y agoIt has been tried and failed multiple times. I never used one, but IIRC the problem is that you must guess what the language will parse and what it will do. For example, if you use c in Wolfram Alpha, sometimes it is interpreted as the speed of light, sometimes as centigrade, sometimes as a constant and sometimes as an error. And sometimes minor changes in other part of the question changes the interpretation of c.