News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Cursor told me I should learn coding instead of asking it to generate it. Parent comment

Re:Cursor told me I should learn coding instead of asking it... by Tainnor on Thursday March 13, 2025 @07:16AM (#43352171)
Those other levels of abstraction that you mentioned are deterministic and predictable. I think that's a massive difference and it justifies why one should be more skeptical towards AI generated code (skeptical doesn't mean "outright dismissing" tbf).
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Cursor told me I should learn coding instead of asking it... by moffkalast on Thursday March 13, 2025 @07:51AM (#43352359)
Deterministic tab completion generates horseshit half the time too, at the end of the day you have to know what you're doing in either case imo. You can also run an LLM in deterministic mode, but performance is usually worse.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Cursor told me I should learn coding instead of asking it... by SleepyMyroslav on Thursday March 13, 2025 @08:23AM (#43352556)
Fun fact that we have burned those bridges years ago. Every time big codebase updates it's main optimizing toolchain (compiler/linker) ... there is nothing deterministic and predictable. There is only what has been re-tested and what has not been.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Cursor told me I should learn coding instead of asking it... by Nullabillity on Thursday March 13, 2025 @08:59AM (#43352849)
> there is nothing deterministic

https://reproducible-builds.org/

> nothing [...] and predictable

Even if the build isn't bit-for-bit-reproducible, any reasonable toolchain will, at least, give predictably equivalent results.

[ Parent | on HN ]