4 ms·
Yes, it will add INSANE amounts of "robust error handling" to quick scripts where I can be confident about assumptions. This turns my clean 40 lines of Python w
by byearthithatius 2y ago
Yes, it will add INSANE amounts of "robust error handling" to quick scripts where I can be confident about assumptions. This turns my clean 40 lines of Python where I KNOW the JSONL I am parsing is valid into 200+ lines filled with ten new try except statements. Even when I tell it not to do this, it loves to "find and help" in other ways. Quite annoying. But overall it is pretty dang good. It even spotted a bug I missed the other day in a big 400+ line complex data processing file.
- zhengyi13 2y agoI wonder how much of that sort of thing is driven by having trained their models on their own internal codebases? Because if that's the case, careful and defensive being the default would be unsurprising.
- stavros 2y agoI didn't realize this was a bigger trend, I asked it to write a simple testing script that POSTed a string to a local HTTP server as JSON, and it wrote a 40 line script, handling any possible error. I just wanted two lines.
- jug 2y agoYes, as late as earlier today, I asked it to provide "naive" code which helped a bit.
- free_energy_min 2y agosame issue here! isn’t even helpful because if the code isn’t working i want it to fail, not just skip over errors
- byearthithatius 1y agoExactly! It using try -> except -> print is the EXACT same as the default error print to STDOUT in 99% of cases. It just assumes we need that or something will get hurt.