4 ms·
Translating a project that includes a good test suite from one language to another is known to be a great case where LLMs work well. When you’re starting with
by Aurornis 6mo ago
Translating a project that includes a good test suite from one language to another is known to be a great case where LLMs work well.
When you’re starting with a complete codebase to use as an example and a test suite to check everything it’s much easier to iterate toward the desired goal. The LLM can already see what the goals are and how they’ve been implemented once already, which is a much easier problem than starting from a spec.
- mezyt 6mo agoGreat case where rust works well too. I won't cite every famous libs that got rewritten in rust but it wasn't all with LLM.
- lionkor 6mo agoI fail to think of a successful Rust rewrite, so far what I've seen is just programmers who aren't sufficiently experienced, who decide to pick Rust and rewrite something in it, and then (this is the bad part) claim it's better for that reason only. It never is. It's always worse, because rewrites fundamentally end up with a worse product first.
- apitman 6mo agoIt's not hard to imagine a future where the only things committed to git repos are tests and specs.
- taftster 6mo agoAnd maybe not even the tests. Just a specification for the tests.
- aurareturn 6mo agoI can see open source projects as just prompts as well.
- Gigachad 6mo agoThe goal posts are always moving. This would have been an unthinkable task a couple years ago.
- osti 6mo agoEven last year at this time people wouldn't believe it.
- FuckButtons 6mo agoSure, but, given that, does it not seem like the conclusion is: if you have something that could in principle be reverse engineered by a competitor with more compute, they can and will steal it, because the only constraint is roi.