Live data from Hacker News

Reliable Software in the LLM Era

quint-lang.org

11–20 of 39 posts

Re: Reliable Software in the LLM Era

#11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I propose a "proof of quality" consensus mechanism. :-)

Sounds great -- let me fire up my agent swarm to get started on orchestrating the development of a planning spec.

Have your agent contact my agent, we will never be in touch

Re: Reliable Software in the LLM Era

#12
post #10

Nothing changes in terms of how to make reliable software. You need the same things like unit tests, integration tests, monitoring tools, etc. Basically AI now makes every product operate as if it has a vibrant open-source community with hundreds of contributions per day and a small core team with limited capacity.

[flagged]

Re: Reliable Software in the LLM Era

#15
post #10

Nothing changes in terms of how to make reliable software. You need the same things like unit tests, integration tests, monitoring tools, etc. Basically AI now makes every product operate as if it has a vibrant open-source community with hundreds of contributions per day and a small core team with limited capacity.

[flagged]

This is no different than receiving PRs from anonymous users on the Internet. Some more successful open source projects are already doing this at scale.

Re: Reliable Software in the LLM Era

#17

AI Era, Agentic Era, LLM Era... Can we settle on Slop Decade?

Shallow dismissals are not permitted on this site as per its rules.

Not everything is worthy of a 5000 word Atlantic-style deconstruction when presented. I think the community largely embraces Hitchens' Razor. That being the case what is the minimum word count required to issue a dismissal?

Re: Reliable Software in the LLM Era

#19
post #10

Nothing changes in terms of how to make reliable software. You need the same things like unit tests, integration tests, monitoring tools, etc. Basically AI now makes every product operate as if it has a vibrant open-source community with hundreds of contributions per day and a small core team with limited capacity.

Exactly. NO SILVER BULLET.

Re: Reliable Software in the LLM Era

#20
post #10

Nothing changes in terms of how to make reliable software. You need the same things like unit tests, integration tests, monitoring tools, etc. Basically AI now makes every product operate as if it has a vibrant open-source community with hundreds of contributions per day and a small core team with limited capacity.

While nothing fundamentally changes i have found an increased need for tests and their taxonomies — because the LLM can “hack” the tests. So, having more robust tests with more ways to organize and run the tests. For example instead of 200 tests maybe i have 1,200, along with some lightweight tools to run tests in different parts of the test taxonomies.

A more concrete example is maybe you have tests that show you put a highlight on the active item tests that show you don’t put the highlight on the inactive items, but with an llm you might also want to have tests that wait a while and verify the highlight is not flickering on and off overtime (something so absurd you wouldn’t even test for it before AI).

The value of these test is in catching areas of the code where things are drifting towards nonsense because humans aren’t reviewing as thoroughly. I don’t think that you can realistically have 100% data coverage and prevent every single bug and not review the code. It’s just that I found that slightly more tests are warranted if you do want to step back.

Post reply on HN