• Eager Eagle@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    16 hours ago

    I’ve seen plenty of code in my life, from humans and AI.

    For the past year or so, these agents can code just fine most of the time, as long as they are given enough context (or have the tools to get it). Regardless of how many downvotes I get here, they really are capable of generating decent code. I’m sorry you couldn’t make it work yet.

    • takeda@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      9 hours ago

      I’ve seen too as I have to review it. AI produces very professionally looking bad code.

      It is so weird to explain, but that’s basically what I see.

      Before LLM I could immediately tell someone’s code is crap, now I have to spend a lot of time trying to understand what it does to reach the same conclusion.

      • Eager Eagle@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        4 hours ago

        My honest opinion is that it’s bad because a lot of people using LLMs have no standards and push the first thing that seems to work. Be mad at who’s at the driving wheel, not the car.

        You absolutely can generate crap with agents/LLMs, and like a humans writing, the first draft will probably be subpar or maybe complete garbage. Every new session is a clean slate, that’s why putting effort in the documents guiding it is so important.

        • Nalivai@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 hour ago

          The car analogy doesn’t work because you’re not the one making the code/driving the car. It drives itself, and you sometimes can propose some directions for it to steer.
          The problems with llm aren’t just that sometimes your shit doesn’t work or obviously bad, that’s what you’re talking about, and that’s what minimally responsible sloperators can catch. The main problem is it writes something that looks OK to a human (that’s a criteria for it) but sometimes it’s unexpectedly idiotic in random places (because not being idiotic wasn’t a criteria). You need to check way more thoroughly for it, and you can’t use normal shortcuts that help you with it. So you obviously don’t do that.

          • Eager Eagle@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            52 seconds ago

            See, that’s the issue. People letting it “drive itself” get worse results. You should be the one holding the standards and guiding the model, otherwise you will be frustrated.

    • Eheran@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      13 hours ago

      But AI bad and human code is so awesome! Better downvote. But seriously, there are people here saying that LLMs can not add anything of value in any way. About as delusional as Republicans.