Comment on AI-generated code contains more bugs and errors than human output

UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

• MountingSuspicion@reddthat.com ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  I think one of the big issues is it often makes nonhuman errors. Sometimes I forget a semicolon or there’s a typo, but I’m well equipped to handle that. In fact, most programs can actually catch that kind of issue already. AI is more likely to generate code that’s hard to follow and therefore harder to check. It makes debugging more difficult.

  source

  • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    AI is more likely to generate code that’s hard to follow and therefore harder to check.

    Sure. It’s making the errors faster and at a far higher volume than any team of humans could do in twice the time. The technology behind inference is literally an iterative process of turning gibberish into something that resembles human text. So its sort of a speed run from baby babble into college level software design by trial, evaluation, and correction over and over and over again.

    But because the baseline comparison code is, itself, full of errors, the estimation you get at the end of the process is going to be scattering errant semicolons (and far more esoteric coding errors) through the body of the program at a frequency equivalent to humans making similar errors over a much longer timeline.

    source
  • 5too@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    Also seems like it’d be a lot harder to modify or extend later

    source