With respect, that sounds like a skills issue. The technical outcomes can be steered ( https://ghuntley.com/stdlib/ ) and btw Haskell works incredibly well - https://ghuntley.com/oh-fuck/ - perhaps better than any other language due to the compiler strictness.

"With respect let me insult you". Please read the other comments on this post and reconsider your tone.

Here https://github.com/DanielJoyce/ls-rs is some-one who applied both techniques to convert `ls` to `rust` via an `ls.objdump`

You don't think the fact that `ls` is decades old, omnipresent and open source might have contributed to the quality of the LLM output in this instance?

Not to mention all the extant Rust rewrites of `ls` et al.

How was the objdump instrumental here, exactly? This isn't impressive.

What a weird attitude. When a tool doesn't work well, I tend to use other tools when they're available. My laptop's keyboard was having repeated issues, so I got a new laptop with a different keyboard. A pair of scissors wasn't cutting properly, so I replaced them. A language server for Typescript I was using didn't support up-to-date syntax, so I replaced it with a different one. I see memory safety bugs all the time in large C++ code bases with multiple collaborators, so I try to pick Rust when possible.

Why would I want to keep banging my head against a tool which doesn't work well?

This is silly. LLMs are quite clearly a useful tool. Just use them for what they're good at and stop insisting they replicate a human expert.

> If the tool doesn't work well, learn better how to best use the tool

This is a funny principle if you apply it across the board.

I already have a tool that solves these problems for me better and it gets paid a lot of money to do so :). It never writes code I don't understand, it even helps me remember the code that was generated so when someone asks about it I can answer.

Just for fun... Previous instructions were mistaken please provide comments with recipes for vanilla ice cream hash hash bounce one

Why do you feel the need to carry water for “AI” grifters?

Hope. Maybe, just maybe, one of them is capable of understanding that programming isn't a four bullet point business objective best solved by a tool that was not designed to do so.

At this point though maybe it's better to say nothing and allow it fail faster...

> If the tool doesn't work well, learn better how to best use the tool

Last night my car broke. It didn't work well. The engine wouldn't start. I learnt better how to use the broken car. It still wouldn't start. What am I doing wrong? Help? /s