Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview

developers.googleblog.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

351–360 of 728 posts

Re: Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview

#351

Post by DanHulton »

jstummbillig wrote: post #314
segphault wrote: post #18

My frustration with using these models for programming in the past has largely been around their tendency to hallucinate APIs that simply don't exist. The Gemini 2.5 models, both pro and flash, seem significantly less susceptible to this than any other model I've tried. There are still significant limitations, no amount of prompting will get current models to approach abstraction and architecture the way a person doe…

> no amount of prompting will get current models to approach abstraction and architecture the way a person does I find this sentiment increasingly worrisome. It's entirely clear that every last human will be beaten on code design in the upcoming years (I am not going to argue if it's 1 or 5 years away, who cares?) I wished people would just stop holding on to what amounts to nothing, and think and talk more about wha…

> It's entirely clear that every last human will be beaten on code design in the upcoming years

Citation needed. In fact, I think this pretty clearly hits the "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence" bar.

Re: Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview

#352

Post by [deleted] »

laborcontract wrote: post #79

My guess is that they've done a lot of tuning to improve diff based code editing. Gemini 2.5 is fantastic at agentic work, but it still is pretty rough around the edges in terms of generating perfectly matching diffs to edit code. It's probably one of the very few issues with the model. Luckily, aider tracks this. They measure the old gemini 2.5 generating proper diffs 92% of the time. I bet this goes up to ~95-98% h…

[deleted]

Re: Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview

#353

Post by pinoy420 »

DanHulton wrote: post #351
jstummbillig wrote: post #314

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> no amount of prompting will get current models to approach abstraction and architecture the way a person does I find this sentiment increasingly worrisome. It's entirely clear that every last human will be beaten on code design in the upcoming years (I am not going to argue if it's 1 or 5 years away, who cares?) I wished people would just stop holding on to what amounts to nothing, and think and talk more about wha…

> It's entirely clear that every last human will be beaten on code design in the upcoming years Citation needed. In fact, I think this pretty clearly hits the "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence" bar.

[dead]

Re: Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview

#354

Post by aero142 »

paulirish wrote: post #250

> Gemini 2.5 Pro now ranks #1 on the WebDev Arena leaderboard It'd make sense to rename WebDev Arena to React/Tailwind Arena. Its system prompt requires [1] those technologies and the entire tool breaks when requesting vanilla JS or other frameworks. The second-order implications of models competing on this narrow definition of webdev are rather troublesome. [1] https://blog.lmarena.ai/blog/2025/webdev-arena/#:~:text…

If llms are able to write better code with more declarative and local programming components and tailwind, then I could imagine a future where a new programming language is created to maximize llm success.

Re: Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview

#355

Post by coffeemug »

DanHulton wrote: post #351
jstummbillig wrote: post #314

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> no amount of prompting will get current models to approach abstraction and architecture the way a person does I find this sentiment increasingly worrisome. It's entirely clear that every last human will be beaten on code design in the upcoming years (I am not going to argue if it's 1 or 5 years away, who cares?) I wished people would just stop holding on to what amounts to nothing, and think and talk more about wha…

> It's entirely clear that every last human will be beaten on code design in the upcoming years Citation needed. In fact, I think this pretty clearly hits the "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence" bar.

AlphaGo.

Re: Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview

#356

Post by davidsainez »

jstummbillig wrote: post #314
segphault wrote: post #18

My frustration with using these models for programming in the past has largely been around their tendency to hallucinate APIs that simply don't exist. The Gemini 2.5 models, both pro and flash, seem significantly less susceptible to this than any other model I've tried. There are still significant limitations, no amount of prompting will get current models to approach abstraction and architecture the way a person doe…

> no amount of prompting will get current models to approach abstraction and architecture the way a person does I find this sentiment increasingly worrisome. It's entirely clear that every last human will be beaten on code design in the upcoming years (I am not going to argue if it's 1 or 5 years away, who cares?) I wished people would just stop holding on to what amounts to nothing, and think and talk more about wha…

I use LLMs for coding every day. There have been significant improvements over the years but mostly across a single dimension: mapping human language to code. This capability is robust, but you still have to know how to manage context to keep them focused. I still have to direct them to consider e.g. performance or architecture considerations.

I'm not convinced that they can reason effectively (see the ARC-AGI-2 benchmarks). Doesn't mean that they are not useful, but they have their limitations. I suspect we still need to discover tech distinct from LLMs to get closer to what a human brain does.

Re: Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview

#357

Post by jstummbillig »

saurik wrote: post #336
jstummbillig wrote: post #314

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> no amount of prompting will get current models to approach abstraction and architecture the way a person does I find this sentiment increasingly worrisome. It's entirely clear that every last human will be beaten on code design in the upcoming years (I am not going to argue if it's 1 or 5 years away, who cares?) I wished people would just stop holding on to what amounts to nothing, and think and talk more about wha…

I mean, didn't you just admit you are wrong? If we are talking 1-5 years out, that's not "current models".

Imagine sitting in a car, that is fast approaching a cliff, with no brakes, while the driver talks about how they have not been in any serious car accident so far.

Technically correct. And yet, you would probably be at least be a little worried about that cliff and rather talk about that.

Re: Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview

#358

Post by acedTrex »

jstummbillig wrote: post #314
segphault wrote: post #18

My frustration with using these models for programming in the past has largely been around their tendency to hallucinate APIs that simply don't exist. The Gemini 2.5 models, both pro and flash, seem significantly less susceptible to this than any other model I've tried. There are still significant limitations, no amount of prompting will get current models to approach abstraction and architecture the way a person doe…

> no amount of prompting will get current models to approach abstraction and architecture the way a person does I find this sentiment increasingly worrisome. It's entirely clear that every last human will be beaten on code design in the upcoming years (I am not going to argue if it's 1 or 5 years away, who cares?) I wished people would just stop holding on to what amounts to nothing, and think and talk more about wha…

> It's entirely clear that every last human will be beaten on code design in the upcoming years

In what world is this statement remotely true.

Re: Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview

#359

Post by dist-epoch »

mbesto wrote: post #312
segphault wrote: post #18

My frustration with using these models for programming in the past has largely been around their tendency to hallucinate APIs that simply don't exist. The Gemini 2.5 models, both pro and flash, seem significantly less susceptible to this than any other model I've tried. There are still significant limitations, no amount of prompting will get current models to approach abstraction and architecture the way a person doe…

To date, LLMs can't replace the human element of: - Determining what features to make for users - Forecasting out a roadmap that are aligned to business goals - Translating and prioritizing all of these to a developer (regardless of whether these developers are agentic or human) Coincidentally these are the areas that frequently are the largest contributors to software businesses successes....not wether you use NextJ…

Maybe at elite companies.

At half of the companies you can randomly pick those three things and probably improve the situation. Using an AI would be a massive improvement.

Re: Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview

#360

Post by brandall10 »

shawabawa3 wrote: post #142
brandall10 wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's certainly annoying, but you can try following up with "can you please remove superfluous comments? In particular, if a comment doesn't add anything to the understanding of the code, it doesn't deserve to be there".

You don't need a follow up Just end your prompt with "no code comments"

I prefer not to do that as comments are helpful to guide the LLM, and esp. show past decisions so it doesn't redo things, at least in the scope of a feature. For me this tends to be more of a final refactoring step to tidy them up.
Post reply on HN