Live data from Hacker News

Command line functions around OpenAI

kadekillary.work

161–170 of 316 posts

Re: Command line functions around OpenAI

#161
post #10

Being efficient at writing code can barely make someone a 5x engineer. A team of people who write code effectively is easy to do. Hyperproductivity in software is all about deciding what problems to tackle. Richard Hipp isn't worried about chipotle restaurant orders in golang, he's worried about how to store data reliably. That isn't a coding puzzle that ChatGTP is likely to help with. Either ChatGTP can do the whole…

I think code-generation is a red herring. I'm more interested in things like:

- Explanation/research ("how does this work?")

- Code analysis ("tell me if you think you see any bugs, refactoring suggestions, etc in this sprawling legacy codebase")

Things that feed into the developer's thought process instead of crudely trying to execute on what it wants

Re: Command line functions around OpenAI

#162
Not mentioned in post this but occured to me by reading:

I think I will start changing my functional prompts to require a JSON format in responses so that various aspects of the response don't need to be manually parsed, and requests can be more reliably piped to subsequent requests.

Re: Command line functions around OpenAI

#163

Writing code is the basic 101 of our industry. Anyone can write a loop or an if statement. With todays computing power, for most applications even poorly written code will run and will execute quite fast. What makes someone a 10x (and i hate that term) is the ability to take requirements, or better yet, a vague idea given to them by the business and turn that into software that benefits the end user and makes the com…

RE>> Anyone can write a loop or an if statement. I had an intern a few years ago -- recent college grad in CompSci. I tried my best to lightly mentor him. One day I was talking about the diff between a compiled language and scripting, mentioned REPL. To demonstrate REPL, I opened up both the windows CMD prompt and the Chrome Developer tools. I mentioned that with a REPL like the Chrome Tools, it's trivial to do FizzBuzz in JavaScript. I explained the problem to him and asked him to take a stab at writing it. This wasn't an interview question, just a discussion and a mentoring opportunity.

He couldn't. What he said next blew me away, coming from a CompSci graduate "Oh, loops, yeah, I never quite understood those. Like, for loops and while loops - I never really got that". I asked if he meant recursion, cause that can be tricky. No - he really could not write a for loop in any language. I wasn't going to shame him and I walked him through it, but I was disappoint. ಠ_ಠ

[Edit: Spelling]

Edit 2...Before I start claiming that CompSci programs are letting students down, I have to consider that the claim that he had a BS in CompSci may have not been accurate. I did not check or verify his transcript. The more I reflect on it, I think he may have had a degree is Web Design and we got pressured to add him to our Software Eng. team because the hiring manager (and his actual mentor outside of work) passed him off as a "Web Developer". Now that I think about it... that seems more likely....Edit 3: It was driving me crazy so I dug up the resume in my inbox ... it was def CompSci, listing C++, C#, Java, and SQL as technologies and data structures and algorithms as courses taken... I'm not sure what to think...

Re: Command line functions around OpenAI

#164
AI-assisted programming tools have already increased my personal coding productivity to the point that they've made me more ambitious: I'm building whole projects that previously I wouldn't have committed to, because they would have taken too long (just past my "worth-it" threshold) otherwise.

Wrote about that here: https://simonwillison.net/2023/Mar/27/ai-enhanced-developmen...

Re: Command line functions around OpenAI

#165

At what point did we stop making fun of that 10x engineer thread and started taking it seriously? Who forgot that 10x was a silly little thing that made zero sense in the real world?

There are obvious examples of 10x performers in every creative endeavor. Why would it be any different in software engineering? There are people who find bugs 10x faster than others, design stuff that's 100x easier to maintain, increase morale of a team vs being an energy drain, make changes faster without breaking stuff, etc. There are a lot of ways one can become 10x more effective than another at building software…

That’s the nature of any long-tailed distribution.

The lie is that anyone can become a 10x [insert thing here] just by trying harder. Self-improvement is a real thing, but everyone can’t be 10x or 6-sigma or world class.

Strive, reach, sure… but ultimately, just make sure you live your life. You only get one, and the clock’s ticking.

Re: Command line functions around OpenAI

#166

What the articles like this miss is that we understand pretty well how ChatGPT writes code. But what about maintenance, and particularly debugging? How would it make these tasks. And we know that these things take much much more time than writing code.

GPT is a much better debugger than coder in my experience. It is a drop in replacement for googling random linux errors too.

"I'm getting this error with the following code. Please add log statements that will test for all the things that could be going wrong "

Saved me about 15 minutes yesterday. Not only does chatGPT generate the probably causes of the error, it knows how to test the code for those errors. The human doesn't even have to read the error message anymore.

Re: Command line functions around OpenAI

#167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The GP is undermining their own point by even mentioning “5x, opening the door to think about this in linear terms. But the concept of a “10x engineer” was never about how fast they produce code, and the multiplier was never a fixed number. The point was that some engineers can choose the right problems and solve them in a way which the majority would never achieve even with unlimited time. As an example, if you took…

Maybe in 2030 the AI will be able to respond to that situation appropriately, like it won't just layer more sticky plasters on top with each additional requirement and make a mess but will re-evaluate the entire history of instructions and rearchitect/refactor the code completely if necessary? And all this with documentation explaining what it did, and optimising the code for human readability, so that even with huge…

I mean, looking at the math that powers these models I don't see how they can replace reasoning. The tokens mean absolutely nothing to the algorithm. It doesn't know how algebra works and if you prompt ChatGPT to propose a new theorem based on some axioms it will produce something that sounds like a theorem...

... but believing it is a theorem would be similar to believing that horoscopes can predict the future as well.

Maybe some day we'll have a model that can be trained to reason as humans do and can do mathematics on its own... we've been talking about that possibility for decades in the automated theorem proving space. However it seems that this is a tough nut to crack.

Training LLMs already takes quite a lot of compute resources and energy. Maybe we will have to wait until we have fusion energy and can afford to cool entire data centers dedicated to training these reasoning models as new theorems are postulated and proofs added.

... or we could simply do it ourselves. The energy inputs for humans compared to output is pretty good and affordable.

However having an LLM that also has facilities to interact with an automated theorem proving system would be a handy tool indeed. There are plenty of times in formal proofs where we want to elide the proof of a theorem we want to use because it's obvious and proving it would be tedious and not make the proof you're writing any more elegant; a future reasoning model that could understand the proof goals and use tactics to solve would be a nice tool indeed.

However I think we're still a long way from that. No reason to get hyped about it.

Re: Command line functions around OpenAI

#170
post #10

Being efficient at writing code can barely make someone a 5x engineer. A team of people who write code effectively is easy to do. Hyperproductivity in software is all about deciding what problems to tackle. Richard Hipp isn't worried about chipotle restaurant orders in golang, he's worried about how to store data reliably. That isn't a coding puzzle that ChatGTP is likely to help with. Either ChatGTP can do the whole…

Define “efficient at writing code”. I find that for many people this means something primitive and absurd like typing faster or remembering things better. Being efficient in the perspective of writing new automation so you don’t have to do the same manual things again can easily make someone a 10x (or greater) engineer. This typically means writing your own tools and not hoping some third party package or framework w…

The other thing is making better choices of what to make, how to make it, and most importantly things not to do. That can often save 9x from most anything.
Post reply on HN