News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Making o1, o3, and Sonnet 3.7 Hallucinate for Everyone. Parent comment

Re:Making o1, o3, and Sonnet 3.7 Hallucinate for Everyone by hombre_fatal on Saturday March 01, 2025 @04:08PM (#43223694)
Boilerplate and plumbing code isn't inherently bad, nor do you improve the codebase by factoring it down to zero with libraries and abstractions.

As I've matured as a developer, I've appreciated certain types of boilerplate more and more because it's code that shows up in your git diffs. You don't need to chase down the code in some version of some library to see how something works.

Of course, not all boilerplate is created equally.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Making o1, o3, and Sonnet 3.7 Hallucinate for Everyone by andix on Saturday March 01, 2025 @04:12PM (#43223723)
Boilerplate is better than bad abstractions. But good abstractions are far superior.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Making o1, o3, and Sonnet 3.7 Hallucinate for Everyone by pertymcpert on Saturday March 01, 2025 @04:21PM (#43223795)
The best abstraction is no abstraction.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Making o1, o3, and Sonnet 3.7 Hallucinate for Everyone by andix on Saturday March 01, 2025 @04:31PM (#43223890)
No.

Edit: I'm not going to code asm just to be cool.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Making o1, o3, and Sonnet 3.7 Hallucinate for Everyone by brookst on Saturday March 01, 2025 @11:09PM (#43227178)
asm? Why would anyone use that useless abstraction over byte code?
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Making o1, o3, and Sonnet 3.7 Hallucinate for Everyone by nuancebydefault on Sunday March 02, 2025 @05:08AM (#43228991)
bytes are abstractions. Only use them if you know upfront how many bits you need.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Making o1, o3, and Sonnet 3.7 Hallucinate for Everyone by xmprt on Saturday March 01, 2025 @05:10PM (#43224255)
I agree with you but as I've matured as a programmer, I feel like it's very hard to get abstractions for boilerplate right. Every library I've seen attempt to do it has struggled.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Making o1, o3, and Sonnet 3.7 Hallucinate for Everyone by Spivak on Saturday March 01, 2025 @10:33PM (#43226977)
Even Rails went with codegen despite being backed by the language most amenable to abstractions.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Making o1, o3, and Sonnet 3.7 Hallucinate for Everyone by int_19h on Sunday March 02, 2025 @01:15AM (#43227895)
I would consider deterministic codegen to be a valid abstraction (or rather a valid implementation of some abstraction). It's not really any different from a regular library wrt ability to test & validate. The problem with any human- and LLM- handwritten code is that even the best coders make mistakes.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Making o1, o3, and Sonnet 3.7 Hallucinate for Everyone by bubblyworld on Sunday March 02, 2025 @03:24AM (#43228488)
Abstractions are like mutations - most of them kill the host =P
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Making o1, o3, and Sonnet 3.7 Hallucinate for Everyone by airstrike on Saturday March 01, 2025 @04:24PM (#43223820)
"A program is like a poem. You cannot write a poem without writing it." — Dijkstra
[ Parent | on HN ]