@glyph LLMs also break the standard 'interchangable parts' of programming... they often end up writing whole new bespoke subroutines, systems, libraries, rather than reuse existing ones...
Like - imagine you are automating building a car, but, every component of every car is being procedurally generated and manuactured for that speciffic car. It's the dumbest possible way to automate *building* things.
@miss_rodent @glyph that depends a lot on how clear the prompts given. If a naïve user doesn't give some initial prompting and ground rules about what language versions, environments and existing libraries are available for use, many coding LLMs will reinvent the wheel with brand new errors rather than using tried And tested library code honed over decades.
Don't outsource thinking to an infinite monkey machine, you still have to task it with clearly written and considered prompts.
@zymurgic @miss_rodent @glyph it can't be that stupid, you must be prompting it wrong