9 ms·
Now, that's actually a very reasonable usage, because it isn't coding, it's translation. The counter to that being beneficial is that many code translation prog
by hattmall 1y ago
Now, that's actually a very reasonable usage, because it isn't coding, it's translation. The counter to that being beneficial is that many code translation programs already exists and it's certainly something that can be built and done so in a way to be certain of security, proper practices etc, which you can't guarantee with LLM and using a specialized program is orders of magnitude less resource intensive.
Of course it's nice as a hobbyist end user to do exactly what you did for a simple script and that's to the credit of the LLM. The over-arching issue is that extremely inefficient process is only possible thanks to subsidization from Venture capital.
- theshrike79 1y agoI personally prefer Go with LLMs because it has a relatively large amount of analyzers and other tooling to statically check that there are no major issues with the code. Also the compiler being a stickler for unused code etc. keeps the Agentic models in check, they can't YOLO stuff as hard like in, say, Python.