Comment by Akronymus
5 days ago
So far, eqch and every time I used an LLM to help me with something it hallucinated non-existant functions or was incorrect in an important but non-obvious way.
Though, I guess I do treat LLM's as a last resort longshot for when other documentation is failing me.
Knowing how to use LLMs is a skill. Just winging it without any practice or exploration of how the tool fails can produce poor results.
"You're holding it wrong"
99% of an LLM's usefulness vanishes, if it behaves like an addled old man.
"What's that sonny? But you said you wanted that!"
"Wait, we did that last week? Sorry let me look at this again"
"What? What do you mean, we already did this part?!"
Wrong mental model. Addled old men can't write code 1000x faster than any human.
2 replies →
Which LLMs have you tried? Claude Code seems to be decent at not hallucinating, Gemini CLI is more eager.
I don't think current LLMs take you all the way but a powerful code generator is a useful think, just assemble guardrails and keep an eye on it.
Mostly chatgpt because I see 0 value in paying for any llm, nor do I wish to gice up my data to any llm provider
Speaking as someone who doesn't really like or do LLM-assisted coding either: at least try Gemini. ChatGPT is the absolute worst you could use. I was quite shocked when I compared the two on the same tasks. Gemini gets decent initial results you can build on. ChatGPT generates 99% absolutely unusable rubbish. The difference is so extreme, it's not even a competition anymore.
I now understand why Altman announced "Code Red" at OpenAI. If their tools don't catch up drastically, and fast, they'll be one for the history books soon. Wouldn't be the first time the big, central early mover in a new market suddenly disappears, steamrolled by the later entrants.
They work better with project context and access to tools, so yeah, the web interface is not their best foot forward.
That doesn't mean the agents are amazing, but they can be useful.
2 replies →