Comment by sas41

I find the claims regarding LLMs and their mistake prone nature around variable names very confusing.

It appears that me and creator have had vastly different experiences with LLMs and their capabilities with complex code bases and complicated business logic.

My observations point to LLMs being much more successful when variables and methods have explicit, detailed names, it's the best way to keep them on track and minimize the chance of confusion, next closest thing being explicit comments and inline documentation.

Poorly named and poorly documented things in a codebase only cause it to reason more on what it could be, often reaching a (wrong) conclusion, wasting tokens, wasting time.

Perhaps this diversion in philosophy is due to fundamental differences in how we view the tool at hand.

I do not trust the machine, as such I review it's output, and if the variables lacked names, that would be significantly harder. But if I had a "Jesus, take the wheel!" attitude, perhaps I'd care far less.