Comment by ptx

Is the use of the term "automatic programming" a deliberate parallel to the development of COBOL [1]?

If so, if this is meant to imply that LLMs are just another step towards higher-level abstractions, the analogy doesn't quite work. Unlike a COBOL compiler, the LLMs output can't be predicted or reasoned about, so you can't really fix bugs in your program (i.e. your prompt) but only try to permute it haphazardly and hope for the best.

[1] https://ethw.org/Milestones:A-0_Compiler_and_Initial_Develop...