Comment by otabdeveloper4
9 hours ago
If you're capable of auditing the LLM’s outputs and doing a decent code review then you don't need an LLM.
9 hours ago
If you're capable of auditing the LLM’s outputs and doing a decent code review then you don't need an LLM.
Nobody who was writing code before LLMs existed "needs" an LLM, but they can still be handy. Procfs parsing trivialities are the kind of thing LLMs are good at, although apparently it still takes a human to say "why not using an existing library that solves this, like https://pkg.go.dev/github.com/prometheus/procfs"
> Procfs parsing trivialities are the kind of thing LLMs are good at
Have you tried it? Procfs trivialities is exactly the kind of thing where an LLM will hallucinate something plausible-looking.
Fixing LLM hallucinations takes more work and time than just reading manpages and writing code yourself.
Claude code can read manpages too
3 replies →
Neither do you need and IDE, syntax highlighting or third party libraries, yet you use all of them.
There's nothing wrong for a software engineer about using LLMs as an additional tool in his toolbox. The problem arises when people stops doing software engineering because they believe the LLM is doing the engineering for them.
I don't use IDEs that require more time and effort investment than they save.
You mileage may vary, though. Lots of software engineers love those time and effort tarpits.
need and can use are different things.