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 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 ]