Prompt Engineering vs. Blind Prompting

Re:Prompt Engineering vs. Blind Prompting by iudqnolq on Saturday April 22, 2023 @03:27PM (#35670122)

This was neither. I've forgotten the exact words I typed but it was something like this.

Prompt:

    fn encode(value: Foo) {
        capnproto::serialize_packed:: serialize_message(value);
    }

    fn decode(input: &[u8]) {

Expected:

   capnproto::serialize_packed:: deserialize_message(input);

Generated

     capnproto::PackedMessageDeserializer::deserialize(input)

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Prompt Engineering vs. Blind Prompting by lstamour on Saturday April 22, 2023 @09:08PM (#35672391)

Maybe a difference between prompts or v3.5 vs v4. I asked ChatGPT v4 and it gave an answer that used capnproto::serialize_packed::read_message. I asked it about the difference between read_message and deserialize_message and this is the response it gave (truncated, as it got some parts wrong):

> In summary, you should use read_message when working with packed messages and deserialize_message when working with unpacked messages. Make sure you choose the appropriate serialization and deserialization functions based on the format in which your messages are stored or transmitted.

Google was surprisingly little help on the topic. At best it pointed me to https://capnproto.org/encoding.html#packing which covers the general idea but glosses over parts.

The problem with ChatGPT is you can never be certain or confident that its answers are correct. It’s as useful as rolling dice in guessing a number sometimes. With the training from the internet, the dice are loaded, but the answer is still likely to be wrong because it just assembles words together.

[ Parent | on HN ]