Every LLM evangelist seems to forget that there is a reason why LLMs work so well for coding. It's because there were and are preexisting non-LLM validation too

Every LLM evangelist seems to forget that there is a reason why LLMs work so well for coding. It's because there were and are preexisting non-LLM validation tools for coding. The slop doesn't make it past linters, compilers, cone analysis and other tools, and then there is a second barrier in the form of code review. And even will these guardrails LLMs often produce substandard output. Buying a ticket, writing an email, setting calendars or fiddling with files on the drive etc. have none of these guardrails. LLMs can and will simply oneshot the slop into a real system, without neither computer nor human validation.