Comment on Show top LLMs buggy code and they'll finish off the mistakes rather than fix them.
Reliant1087@lemmy.world 3 weeks agoI’ve found it okay to get a general feel for stuff but I’ve been given insidiously bad code. Functions and data structures that look similar enough to real stuff but are deeply wrong or non+existent.
bpev@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
Mmm it sounds like you’re using it in a very different way to me; by the time I’m using an LLM, I generally have way more than a general feel for what I’m looking for. People rag on ai for being a “fancy autocomplete”, but that’s literally what I like to use it for. I’ll feed it a detailed spec for what I need, give it a skeleton function with type definitions, and tell the ai to fill it in. It generally fills in basic functions pretty well with that level of definition (ymmv depending on the scope of the function).
This lets me focus more on the code design/structure and validation, while the ai handles a decent amount of grunt work. And if it does a bad job, I would have written the spec and skeleton anyways, so it’s more like bonus if it works.
Reliant1087@lemmy.world 2 days ago
Thank you! I’ll try this out. I’ve been mostly using it while playing around with new things rather than to expand scaffolding on existing stuff.
However what I find frustrating is that it so confidently gives you garbage sometimes. I was trying to configure some stuff in docker that needed a very extensive yaml config. It confidently gave me flags and keys to accomplish what I wanted that looked logical and fit in with rest of the style but simply did not exist.