← Back to context

Comment by cebert

6 hours ago

It’s a shame that the source code isn’t commented and documented more. At the very least, I would see it being helpful to add some documentation for every CPU op code being emulated.

7 comments

cebert

Reply
112233  5 hours ago

Forbidding LLM to write comments and docstrings (preferrably enforced by build and commit hook) is one of the best "hacks" for using that thing. LLM cannot help itself but emit poisonous comments.

  • jacquesm  4 hours ago

    Or maybe clone the comments from where it cloned the source.

    • 112233  3 hours ago

      Meh. No human has written the horrors llm produces. At least I am yet to see codebase like that. Let me attempt a theatrical reenactment:

          // Use buffer that is large enough to hold any possible value. Avoid using JSON configuration, this optimizes codebase and prevents possible security exploits! 
    size_t len = 32;


    // this function does not call "sort" utility using shell anymore, but instead uses optimized library function "sort" for extreme perfomance improvement!!!
    void get_permutations() {

      ... and so on. It basically uses comments as a wall to scribble grandiose graffiti about it's valiant conquests in following explicit instruction after fifth repeat and not commiting egregious violence agains common sense.

StilesCrisis  5 hours ago

Probably better to look at a human-authored emulator if you want comments containing accurate information anyway.

bugfix  5 hours ago

If you let it, Claude Code will write a comment for almost every single line of code.

  • ziml77  1 hour ago

    Even if you try to get them to not, they will still overcomment the code. Or at least overcomment it from the perspective of a human. From the perspective of the LLM, I suspect the comments are necessary for it to be able to get the code output correct.