Re:GPT-4 is getting worse over time, not better
by lukas099 on Wednesday July 19, 2023 @11:54AM
(#36788460)
It is still ignoring an explicit requirement, which is almost always bad. The user should be able to override what the creator/application thinks is 'strictly better'. Exceptions probably exist, but this isn't one of them.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:GPT-4 is getting worse over time, not better
by lolinder on Wednesday July 19, 2023 @12:03PM
(#36788615)
Like I said, I read their requirement differently—the phrase they use is "the code only".
I don't think that including backticks is a violation of this requirement. It's still readily parseable and serves as metadata for interpreting the code. In the context of ChatGPT, which typically will provide a full explanation for the code snippet, I think this is a reasonable interpretation of the instruction.
Re:GPT-4 is getting worse over time, not better
by lukas099 on Wednesday July 19, 2023 @01:43PM
(#36790298)
I understand your point better now. I'm still not sure how I feel about it, because code + metadata is still not "the code only", but it's not a totally unreasonable interpretation of the phrase.