3 ms·
Strange. I wouldn’t trust the output of a coding agent and I would want stronger review of its output. If it passes a strict compiler that gives me more confide
by testdelacc1 9mo ago
Strange. I wouldn’t trust the output of a coding agent and I would want stronger review of its output. If it passes a strict compiler that gives me more confidence than if it passed a lax one.
But sure, if you trust it to have written C++ to a higher standard than the experts, then go for it.
- pjmlp 9mo agoSo not into the vibe coding hype taking over all our jobs?
- testdelacc1 9mo agoIt is what it is, I accept that’s where the industry is heading. But if I have to produce reams of code I’d much rather have it be reviewed by rustc than clang. rustc may take longer to satisfy, but it’ll be worth it because I won’t be responsible for horrors in production. You’re happy to be responsible for buffer overflows written by an LLM? I’m not, which is why I prefer a language where it’s not possible.
- pjmlp 9mo agoIt is definitely possible, only not as easy.
- testdelacc1 9mo agoEven reviewing human written C++ is difficult. Android has had 20 years to figure it out and they couldn’t find a way to reduce the number of vulnerabilities they introduced in carefully crafted C++ code. I shudder to think how many more they would have introduced if they had vibe coded it.