3 ms·
The coding agent heading. Claude Code and tools like it represent a huge improvement in what you can usefully get done with LLMs. Mistakes and hallucinations m
by simonw 11mo ago
The coding agent heading. Claude Code and tools like it represent a huge improvement in what you can usefully get done with LLMs.
Mistakes and hallucinations matter a whole lot less if a reasoning LLM can try the code, see that it doesn't work and fix the problem.
- walt_grata 11mo agoIf it actually does that without an argument. I can't believe I have to say that about a computer program
- skydhash 11mo ago> The coding agent heading. Claude Code and tools like it represent a huge improvement in what you can usefully get done with LLMs. Does it? It's all prompt manipulation. Shell script are powerful yes, but not really huge improvement over having a shell (REPL interface) to the system. And even then a lot of programs just use syscalls or wrapper libraries. > can try the code, see that it doesn't work and fix the problem. Can you really say that does happens reliably?
- simonw 11mo agoDepends on what you mean by "reliably". If you mean 100% correct all of the time then no. If you mean correct often enough that you can expect it to be a productive assistant that helps solve all sorts of problems faster than you could solve them without it, and which makes mistakes infrequently enough that you waste less time fixing them than you would doing everything by yourself then yes, it's plenty reliable enough now.
- dham 11mo agoYou're welcome to try the LLM's yourself and come up with your own conclusions. By what you've posted it doesn't look like you've tried the anything in the last 2 years. Yes LLM's can be annoying, but there has been progress.