Newest at the top
| 2025-10-30 21:06:17 +0100 | <segfaultfizzbuzz> | yeah sorry, not type signature in isolation, i meant type signature as a hard restriction on the validity of the LLM output, given a reasonable prompt |
| 2025-10-30 21:05:56 +0100 | <segfaultfizzbuzz> | type signature plus a description/comment |
| 2025-10-30 21:05:52 +0100 | <EvanR> | maybe you mean the carefully chosen name of the function |
| 2025-10-30 21:05:44 +0100 | <EvanR> | the type signature is usually not enough to judge what you want it to do |
| 2025-10-30 21:05:21 +0100 | <segfaultfizzbuzz> | EvanR: oh? |
| 2025-10-30 21:05:13 +0100 | <EvanR> | no |
| 2025-10-30 21:05:01 +0100 | <segfaultfizzbuzz> | or at least that's what i find |
| 2025-10-30 21:05:00 +0100 | <EvanR> | lol |
| 2025-10-30 21:04:54 +0100 | <segfaultfizzbuzz> | roughly speaking if you can write the type signature of your function then ai seems like it can do decently at filling in the rest 50% to 75% of the time... |
| 2025-10-30 21:04:17 +0100 | <geekosaur> | why large language models are what led to something that comes across as "actual AI" |
| 2025-10-30 21:04:11 +0100 | <segfaultfizzbuzz> | EvanR: yeah i would say that "without understanding any of it" isn't what i do, but it can save me a lot of round trips back and forth from documentation and also it can sometimes stich things nicely (type conversions, etc) |
| 2025-10-30 21:03:43 +0100 | <geekosaur> | and makes a lot of sense if you think about it |
| 2025-10-30 21:03:35 +0100 | <segfaultfizzbuzz> | geekosaur: why LLMs in the first place? explain? |
| 2025-10-30 21:03:23 +0100 | <geekosaur> | seriously, it explains a lot of things, including why LLMs in the first place |
| 2025-10-30 21:03:10 +0100 | <EvanR> | if you start pasting large amounts of code generated by the LLM into the project without understanding any of it, well, it will start to break down, and there's plenty of memes about where this leads |
| 2025-10-30 21:02:47 +0100 | <segfaultfizzbuzz> | hahaha markov chains :-) you might not be wrong there |
| 2025-10-30 21:02:34 +0100 | <geekosaur> | which means it's only as good as the Markov chains it can build from its training data |
| 2025-10-30 21:02:30 +0100 | <segfaultfizzbuzz> | and then there is architecting your application so that you can kind of limit the damage that can happen, but i would imagine that's the same as structuring code for writing on a team |
| 2025-10-30 21:02:24 +0100 | <haskellbridge> | <sm> the coding tools and chat bots are no longer just that |
| 2025-10-30 21:02:04 +0100 | <geekosaur> | keep in mind that current AI still doesn't understand anything; it's a Markov bot with a smarter notion of how language fits together |
| 2025-10-30 21:01:57 +0100 | <segfaultfizzbuzz> | geekosaur: there also is how you prompt,... if your language is better you get better results i think |
| 2025-10-30 21:01:57 +0100 | <haskellbridge> | <sm> yes also the model, the ai-based coding tool, the context, the prompts all matter |
| 2025-10-30 21:01:22 +0100 | <geekosaur> | the question is what it was trained on. if you have a lot of blog posts by people who're still learning the language, the code the AI will produce will mostly be at their level |
| 2025-10-30 21:01:02 +0100 | <EvanR> | I use it for C and it still needs to be checked, obviously |
| 2025-10-30 21:00:44 +0100 | <segfaultfizzbuzz> | js is awful,... rust is like,... not bad i find |
| 2025-10-30 21:00:43 +0100 | <haskellbridge> | <sm> I don't think you can generalise, it depends what you're doing |
| 2025-10-30 21:00:36 +0100 | <segfaultfizzbuzz> | geekosaur: oh? nice :-) |
| 2025-10-30 21:00:31 +0100 | <geekosaur> | even js needs to be checked |
| 2025-10-30 21:00:27 +0100 | <segfaultfizzbuzz> | lol yeah sorry i forgot to mention using neuralink while using tesla self driving |
| 2025-10-30 21:00:22 +0100 | merijn | (~merijn@host-vr.cgnat-g.v4.dfn.nl) (Ping timeout: 260 seconds) |
| 2025-10-30 21:00:19 +0100 | <geekosaur> | ai gets haskell very wrong still |
| 2025-10-30 21:00:14 +0100 | <haskellbridge> | <loonycyborg> Direct neural uplink better |
| 2025-10-30 21:00:10 +0100 | <haskellbridge> | <sm> it varies a lot |
| 2025-10-30 21:00:08 +0100 | <EvanR> | in the same way that handwriting is not a thing anymore |
| 2025-10-30 21:00:06 +0100 | <segfaultfizzbuzz> | hahaha... but seriously...? |
| 2025-10-30 20:59:08 +0100 | <EvanR> | you will be ridiculed for using your keyboard at all. Voice input to an LLM is the only way to signal how up to date you are |
| 2025-10-30 20:57:01 +0100 | <segfaultfizzbuzz> | what are the norms these days regarding using "ai" to code among good quality professional programmers. is it fine to use or do i need to type everything into my keyboard myself |
| 2025-10-30 20:56:33 +0100 | peterbecich | (~Thunderbi@172.222.148.214) peterbecich |
| 2025-10-30 20:55:15 +0100 | merijn | (~merijn@host-vr.cgnat-g.v4.dfn.nl) merijn |
| 2025-10-30 20:48:52 +0100 | Sgeo | (~Sgeo@user/sgeo) Sgeo |
| 2025-10-30 20:46:04 +0100 | Sgeo | (~Sgeo@user/sgeo) (Read error: Connection reset by peer) |
| 2025-10-30 20:45:25 +0100 | segfaultfizzbuzz | (~segfaultf@23-93-74-222.fiber.dynamic.sonic.net) segfaultfizzbuzz |
| 2025-10-30 20:44:44 +0100 | merijn | (~merijn@host-vr.cgnat-g.v4.dfn.nl) (Ping timeout: 256 seconds) |
| 2025-10-30 20:39:28 +0100 | merijn | (~merijn@host-vr.cgnat-g.v4.dfn.nl) merijn |
| 2025-10-30 20:36:44 +0100 | opencircuit | (~quassel@user/opencircuit) opencircuit |
| 2025-10-30 20:35:34 +0100 | opencircuit_ | (~quassel@user/opencircuit) (Remote host closed the connection) |
| 2025-10-30 20:28:49 +0100 | merijn | (~merijn@host-vr.cgnat-g.v4.dfn.nl) (Ping timeout: 264 seconds) |
| 2025-10-30 20:27:16 +0100 | rvalue- | rvalue |
| 2025-10-30 20:23:38 +0100 | merijn | (~merijn@host-vr.cgnat-g.v4.dfn.nl) merijn |
| 2025-10-30 20:20:22 +0100 | haltingsolver | (~cmo@2604:3d09:207f:8000::d1dc) (Ping timeout: 256 seconds) |