Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
not everyone is american
[deleted]
Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview
111–120 of 728 posts
Re: Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview
#112My 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…
Making LLMs know what they don't know is a hard problem. Many attempts at making them refuse to answer what they don't know caused them to refuse to answer things they did in fact know.
[deleted]
Re: Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview
#113I keep hearing good things about Gemini online and offline. I wrote them off as terrible when they first launched and have not looked back since.
How are they now? Sufficiently good? Competent? Competitive? Or limited? My needs are very consumer oriented, not programming/api stuff.
Re: Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview
#114Earlier quoted context omitted.
It also does super defensive coding. Not that it's a bad thing in general, but I write a lot of prototype code.
Production quality code is defensive. Probably trained on a lot of google code.
Does the code consist of many large try except blocks that catch "Exception", which Gemini seems to like doing, (I thought it was a bad practice to catch the generic Exception in Python)
Re: Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview
#115Hasn't Gemini 2.5 Pro been out for a while? At first I was very impressed with it's coding abilities, switching off of Claud for it but recently I've been using GPT o3 which I find is much more concise and generally better at problem solving when you hit an error.
Think that was still the experimental model incorrectly labeled by many platforms as “Pro”
That's inaccurate. First, there was the experimental 03-25 checkpoint. Then it was promoted to Preview without changing anything. And now we have a new 05-06 checkpoint, still called Gemini 2.5 Pro, and still in Preview.
Re: Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview
#116Earlier quoted context omitted.
I have the same issue plus unnecessary refactorings (that break functionality). it doesn't matter if I write a whole paragraph in the chat or the prompt explaining I don't want it to change anything else apart from what is required to fulfill my very specific request. It will just go rogue and massacre the entirety of the file.
Where/how do you use it? I've only tried this model through GitHub Copilot in VS Code and I haven't experienced much changing of random things.
I've used it via Google's own AI studio and via my own library/program using the API and finally via Aider. All of them lead to the same outcome, large chunks of changes to a lot of unrelated things ("helpful" refactors that I didn't ask for) and tons of unnecessary comments everywhere (like those comments you ask junior devs to stop making). No amount of prompting seems to address either problems.
Re: Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview
#117Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, it's just bad. I've been writing a lot of Python code past two days with Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview, and all of its code was like: ```python def whatever(): --- SECTION ONE OF THE CODE --- ... --- SECTION TWO OF THE CODE --- try: [some "dangerous" code] except Exception as e: logging.error(f"Failed to save files to {output_path}: {e}") # Decide whether to raise the error or just warn # raise IOError(f"Failed to save…
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".
I'm having the same issue, and no matter what I prompt (even stuff like "Don't add any comments at all to anything, at any time") it still tries to add these typical junior-dev comments where it's just re-iterating what the code on the next line does.
Re: Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview
#118Earlier quoted context omitted.
Every time I ask an LLM to not write comments, it still litters it with comments. Is Gemini better about that?
LLMs are extremely poor at following negative instructions, tell them what to do, not what not to do.
Ok, so saying "Implement feature X" leads to a ton of comments. How do you rewrite that comment to not include "don't write comments" while making the output not containing comments? "Write only source code, no plain text with special characters in the beginning of the line" or what are you suggesting here in practical terms?
Re: Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview
#119Earlier quoted context omitted.
I have been asking if AI without hallucination, coding or not is possible but so far with no real concrete answer.
It's already much improved on the early days. But I wonder when we'll be happy? Do we expect colleagues friends and family to be 100% laser-accurate 100% of the time? I'd wager we don't. Should we expect that from an artificial intelligence too?
If colleagues lie with the certainty that LLMs do, they would get fired for incompetence.
Re: Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview
#120Be careful, this model is worse than 03-25 in 10 of the 12 benchmarks (!) I bet they kept training on coding, made everything worse on the way, and tried to hide it under the rug because of the sunk costs.
[deleted]