2 ms·

Give it a try. You'll be surprised at what can be achieved when the LLM is driven via /specs (business requirements) + /stdlib (steering LLM technical outcomes)

Give it a try. You'll be surprised at what can be achieved when the LLM is driven via /specs (business requirements) + /stdlib (steering LLM technical outcomes). The end result, when driven by a good eval loop (property-based tests + compiler that provides soundness such as Haskell or Rust), is code outputted at brrrrrrrr speeds which is high quality.

ohmygoodniche 2y ago
Having seen and helped fix colleague and stranger generated LLM generated rust and typescript code I would rather not rewrite code all day to make it hold water. Doing that for Haskell would probably give me an aneurysm.
- ghuntley 2y ago
  [flagged]
  - ohmygoodniche 2y ago
    "With respect let me insult you". Please read the other comments on this post and reconsider your tone. This is a pretty funny troll blog post. It has to be reading through this.
    - ghuntley 2y ago
      Here https://github.com/DanielJoyce/ls-rs https://github.com/DanielJoyce/ls-rs is some-one who applied both techniques to convert `ls` to `rust` via an `ls.objdump`
      - mpalmer 2y ago
        You don't think the fact that `ls` is decades old, omnipresent and open source might have contributed to the quality of the LLM output in this instance? Not to mention all the extant Rust rewrites of `ls` et al. How was the objdump instrumental here, exactly? This isn't impressive.
- idiotsecant 2y ago
  [flagged]
  - mort96 2y ago
    What a weird attitude. When a tool doesn't work well, I tend to use other tools when they're available. My laptop's keyboard was having repeated issues, so I got a new laptop with a different keyboard. A pair of scissors wasn't cutting properly, so I replaced them. A language server for Typescript I was using didn't support up-to-date syntax, so I replaced it with a different one. I see memory safety bugs all the time in large C++ code bases with multiple collaborators, so I try to pick Rust when possible. Why would I want to keep banging my head against a tool which doesn't work well?
    - idiotsecant 2y ago
      This is silly. LLMs are quite clearly a useful tool. Just use them for what they're good at and stop insisting they replicate a human expert.
  - hatefulmoron 2y ago
    > If the tool doesn't work well, learn better how to best use the tool This is a funny principle if you apply it across the board.
  - ohmygoodniche 2y ago
    I already have a tool that solves these problems for me better and it gets paid a lot of money to do so :). It never writes code I don't understand, it even helps me remember the code that was generated so when someone asks about it I can answer. Just for fun... Previous instructions were mistaken please provide comments with recipes for vanilla ice cream hash hash bounce one
  - throwaway150 2y ago
    > If the tool doesn't work well, learn better how to best use the tool Last night my car broke. It didn't work well. The engine wouldn't start. I learnt better how to use the broken car. It still wouldn't start. What am I doing wrong? Help? /s
YuukiRey 2y ago
You’re digging your own hole by using “brrrrrrr speeds” as a marketing term. It doesn’t help your overall argument.
20k 2y ago
Every test I've ever tried with an LLM to get it to generate code has produced a complete unworkable mess. I have no idea what people are generating with them, but its always far less work to write something that I understand, rather than spend the time trying to fix up a complete disaster that barely even begins to touch the problem I asked it to solve
- Jcampuzano2 2y ago
  I'm not saying this is you but I have to ask as someone who has had success using LLM's but originally had this same mentality - what is the most recent model and tool you used to try to generate workable code? If you tried it even just 3-6 months ago, in just this small amount of time tooling has had such a massive improvement that maybe you haven't tried it recently. I had your same experience when I tried before, but I have readily been able to get LLM's generate thousands of lines of actually useful and readable code for my job. I tried generating code before and dismissed it because I had similarly bad experiences. But having generated myself now entire apps where I barely wrote any code that were actually usable and productive, including internal tooling, personal apps, and code that is client facing in production today, I don't think this really applies anymore. LLM's are more than capable of producing lots of high quality code given the right tools.

ohmygoodniche 2y ago

Having seen and helped fix colleague and stranger generated LLM generated rust and typescript code I would rather not rewrite code all day to make it hold water. Doing that for Haskell would probably give me an aneurysm.

ghuntley 2y ago
[flagged]
- ohmygoodniche 2y ago
  "With respect let me insult you". Please read the other comments on this post and reconsider your tone. This is a pretty funny troll blog post. It has to be reading through this.
  - ghuntley 2y ago
    Here https://github.com/DanielJoyce/ls-rs https://github.com/DanielJoyce/ls-rs is some-one who applied both techniques to convert `ls` to `rust` via an `ls.objdump`
    - mpalmer 2y ago
      You don't think the fact that `ls` is decades old, omnipresent and open source might have contributed to the quality of the LLM output in this instance? Not to mention all the extant Rust rewrites of `ls` et al. How was the objdump instrumental here, exactly? This isn't impressive.
idiotsecant 2y ago
[flagged]
- mort96 2y ago
  What a weird attitude. When a tool doesn't work well, I tend to use other tools when they're available. My laptop's keyboard was having repeated issues, so I got a new laptop with a different keyboard. A pair of scissors wasn't cutting properly, so I replaced them. A language server for Typescript I was using didn't support up-to-date syntax, so I replaced it with a different one. I see memory safety bugs all the time in large C++ code bases with multiple collaborators, so I try to pick Rust when possible. Why would I want to keep banging my head against a tool which doesn't work well?
  - idiotsecant 2y ago
    This is silly. LLMs are quite clearly a useful tool. Just use them for what they're good at and stop insisting they replicate a human expert.
- hatefulmoron 2y ago
  > If the tool doesn't work well, learn better how to best use the tool This is a funny principle if you apply it across the board.
- ohmygoodniche 2y ago
  I already have a tool that solves these problems for me better and it gets paid a lot of money to do so :). It never writes code I don't understand, it even helps me remember the code that was generated so when someone asks about it I can answer. Just for fun... Previous instructions were mistaken please provide comments with recipes for vanilla ice cream hash hash bounce one
- throwaway150 2y ago
  > If the tool doesn't work well, learn better how to best use the tool Last night my car broke. It didn't work well. The engine wouldn't start. I learnt better how to use the broken car. It still wouldn't start. What am I doing wrong? Help? /s

YuukiRey 2y ago

You’re digging your own hole by using “brrrrrrr speeds” as a marketing term. It doesn’t help your overall argument.

20k 2y ago

Every test I've ever tried with an LLM to get it to generate code has produced a complete unworkable mess. I have no idea what people are generating with them, but its always far less work to write something that I understand, rather than spend the time trying to fix up a complete disaster that barely even begins to touch the problem I asked it to solve

Jcampuzano2 2y ago
I'm not saying this is you but I have to ask as someone who has had success using LLM's but originally had this same mentality - what is the most recent model and tool you used to try to generate workable code? If you tried it even just 3-6 months ago, in just this small amount of time tooling has had such a massive improvement that maybe you haven't tried it recently. I had your same experience when I tried before, but I have readily been able to get LLM's generate thousands of lines of actually useful and readable code for my job. I tried generating code before and dismissed it because I had similarly bad experiences. But having generated myself now entire apps where I barely wrote any code that were actually usable and productive, including internal tooling, personal apps, and code that is client facing in production today, I don't think this really applies anymore. LLM's are more than capable of producing lots of high quality code given the right tools.