151–160 of 343 posts
Is Claude code better than ChatGPT?
I like how Claude code is more advanced in terms of CLI functionality but I prefer Codex output (with model high)
If you do not want to pay for both, then you can pick anyone and go with it. I don't think the difference is huge.
It's very useful when you get the answer in several minutes rather than half a hour.
I've used Claude Code in the past month to do development on CoMaps [1] using the 20 USD/month plan. I've been able to do things that I would not have the competence for otherwise, as I do not have a formal software engineering background and my main expertise is writing python data processing scripts. E.g., yesterday I fixed a bug [2] by having Claude compare the CarPlay and iOS search implementations. It did at fir…
Hope to make the bridge soon with i18n of cartes.app.
I also use LLMs to work on it. Mistral, mostly.
LLMs are also good for writing quick experiments and benchmarks to satisfy someone's curiosity. For example, once I was wondering, how much time does it take to migrate a cache line between cores when several processes access the same variable - and after I wrote a detailed benchmark algorithm, LLM generated the code instantly. Note that I described the algorithm completely and what it did is just translated it into…
Maybe it is because they generate the code in one pass and cannot return back and fix the issues. LLM makers, you should allow LLMs to review and edit the generated code.
What was the new speed after the upgrade?
No tests whatsoever. This isn't getting close to being merged into mainline and it will stay out-of-tree for a long time. That's even before taking on the brutal linux kernel mailing lists for code review explaining what that C code does which could be riddled with bugs that Claude generated. No thanks and no deal.
[flagged]
LLMs are also good for writing quick experiments and benchmarks to satisfy someone's curiosity. For example, once I was wondering, how much time does it take to migrate a cache line between cores when several processes access the same variable - and after I wrote a detailed benchmark algorithm, LLM generated the code instantly. Note that I described the algorithm completely and what it did is just translated it into…
Also I wanted to add that LLMs (at least free ones) are pretty dumb sometimes and do not notice obvious thing. For example, when writing tests they generate lot of duplicated code and do not move it into a helper function, or do not combine tests using parametrization. I have to do it manually every time. Maybe it is because they generate the code in one pass and cannot return back and fix the issues. LLM makers, you…
Also I wanted to add that LLMs (at least free ones) are pretty dumb sometimes and do not notice obvious thing. For example, when writing tests they generate lot of duplicated code and do not move it into a helper function, or do not combine tests using parametrization. I have to do it manually every time.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
> "AI" models are trained at the expense of underpaid workers filtering inputs of abhorrent content, and does not respect the owners of input content. Ethically, it sucks. These ethics are definitely derived from a profit motive, however petty it may be.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> 2. We will not accept changes (code or otherwise) created with the aid of "AI" tooling. "AI" models are trained at the expense of underpaid workers filtering inputs of abhorrent content, and does not respect the owners of input content. Ethically, it sucks. Do you disagree with some part of the statement regarding "AI" in their CoC? Do you think there's a fault in their logic, or do you yourself personally just not…
[flagged]
(and of course without non-profit motivations, none of the open source ecosystem would exist!)
I was banned from an OpenSource project [1] recently because I suggested a bug fix. Their „code of conduct“ not only prevents PRs but also comments on issues with information that was retrieved by any AI tool or resource. Thinking about asking Claude to reimplement it from scratch in Rust… [1] https://codeberg.org/superseriousbusiness/gotosocial/src/bra...
> 2. We will not accept changes (code or otherwise) created with the aid of "AI" tooling. "AI" models are trained at the expense of underpaid workers filtering inputs of abhorrent content, and does not respect the owners of input content. Ethically, it sucks. Do you disagree with some part of the statement regarding "AI" in their CoC? Do you think there's a fault in their logic, or do you yourself personally just not…
It does nothing to fix the issues of unpaid FOSS labor, though, but that was a problem well before the recent rise of LLMs.