Human coders are still better than LLMs

Re:Human coders are still better than LLMs by marcosdumay on Thursday May 29, 2025 @01:39PM (#44128310)

Hum... I imagine LLMs are better than every developer on getting CSS keywords right like the GP pointed. And I expect every LLM to be slightly worse than most classical autocompletes.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Human coders are still better than LLMs by skydhash on Thursday May 29, 2025 @01:48PM (#44128404)

Getting CSS keywords right is not the actual point of writing CSS. And you can have a linter that helps you in that regards. The endgame of writing CSS is to style an HTML page according to the specifications of a design. Which can be as detailed as a figma file or as flimsy as a drawing on a whiteboard.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Human coders are still better than LLMs by lelandfe on Thursday May 29, 2025 @01:43PM (#44128356)

I'm one of those weirdos who really likes handwriting CSS. I frequently find ChatGPT getting my requests wrong.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Human coders are still better than LLMs by jjgreen on Thursday May 29, 2025 @01:48PM (#44128406)

... even better with a good fountain pen ...

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Human coders are still better than LLMs by michaelsalim on Thursday May 29, 2025 @05:31PM (#44130591)

This is like saying that LLMs are better at knowing the name of that one obscure API. It's not wrong, but it's also not the hard part about CSS

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Human coders are still better than LLMs by klabb3 on Thursday May 29, 2025 @09:30PM (#44131949)

Wait until they hear how good dictionaries are at spelling.

[ Parent | on HN ]