3 ms·
Humans will need to have visibility into application code, sure, but not likely optimized visibility - compiling and transpiling are good precedents for this. T
by norton120 2y ago
Humans will need to have visibility into application code, sure, but not likely optimized visibility - compiling and transpiling are good precedents for this. There was(is?) likely an argument to be made that humans need to be able to directly review bytecode or minified JS, but these certainly aren't optimized for humans. I do think there would be some version of an IDE that makes human traversal of a bot-optimized codebase easier, but the more we expect the LLM to do, the more we will need to favor optimizing for the LLM over optimizing for human developers.
- verdverm 2y agoI tend to believe we are nowhere near the point it makes sense to deploy LLMs at a scale where it makes sense to optimize code for them. They make far too many mistakes. You can always reorganize the code when you send it to them, which is what is happening anyway since it all goes into a flat context as part of the stream of input tokens. Additionally - a number of issues around how specific languages work will arise because they expect code to be organized a specific way - the snippet assembly phase with LLMs will introduce non-determinism to the software building process, which in itself should give pause to reconsider the approach. Reproducibility and provenance are important to the software supply chain