Live data from Hacker News

How I program with LLMs

crawshaw.io

81–90 of 342 posts

Re: How I program with LLMs

#81
post #80

> I could not go a week without getting frustrated by how much mundane typing I had to do before having a FIM model For those not in-the-know, I just learned today that code autocomplete is actually called "Fill-in-the-Middle" tasks

Says who? I've been in the industry for nearly 25 years and have heard auto complete throughout but not once have I heard fill in the middle.

Stop taking these blogs as oracle's of truth, they are not. These AI articles are full of this nonsense, to the point where it would appear to me many responses might just be Nvidia bots or whatever.

Re: How I program with LLMs

#83
post #2

The first rule of programming with LLMs is don't use them for anything you don't know how to do. If you can look at the solution and immediately know what's wrong with it, they are a time saver otherwise... I find chat for search is really helpful (as the article states)

I'd like to rephrase as, "don't deploy LLM generated code if you don't know how it works (or what it does)"

This means, it's okay to use LLM to try something new that you're on the fence about. Learn it and then once you've learned that concept or the idea, you can go ahead to use same code if it's good enough.

Re: How I program with LLMs

#84

Does anyone know of any good chat based ui builders. No. Not build a chat app. Does webflow have something? My problem is being able to describe what I want in the style I want.

https://lovable.dev

https://bolt.new

https://v0.dev

Never used them myself but have seen them mentioned on Reddit and Twitter.

Re: How I program with LLMs

#85
post #81
post #80

> I could not go a week without getting frustrated by how much mundane typing I had to do before having a FIM model For those not in-the-know, I just learned today that code autocomplete is actually called "Fill-in-the-Middle" tasks

Says who? I've been in the industry for nearly 25 years and have heard auto complete throughout but not once have I heard fill in the middle. Stop taking these blogs as oracle's of truth, they are not. These AI articles are full of this nonsense, to the point where it would appear to me many responses might just be Nvidia bots or whatever.

>I've been in the industry for nearly 25 years and have heard auto complete throughout but not once have I heard fill in the middle

Then you need to look harder. FiM is a common approach for code generation LLMs.

https://openai.com/index/efficient-training-of-language-mode...

https://arxiv.org/abs/2207.14255

This was before ChatGPT's release btw.

Re: How I program with LLMs

#86
post #67
post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The autocomplete is mostly a nusance and maybe low percentage of the time it does right.

The biggest nuisance aspect for me is when it is trying to do things that the LSP can do 100% correctly. Almost surely it is my tooling setup and the LLM is squashing LSP stuff. Seeing Copilot (or even Cursor) suggesting methods or parameters that don't exist is really annoying. Just stand down and let the LSP answer those basic questions, TYVM.

Cursor ostensibly has a config setting to run a “shadow” workspace [1], aka a headless copy of the window you’re working in to get feedback from linters and LSPs but they’ve been iterating so fast I’m not sure it’s still working (or ever did much, really).

It really feels like we’re at the ARPANET stage where there’s so much obvious hanging fruit, it’s just going to take companies a while to perfect it.

[1] https://www.cursor.com/blog/shadow-workspace

Re: How I program with LLMs

#87
post #30
post #2

The first rule of programming with LLMs is don't use them for anything you don't know how to do. If you can look at the solution and immediately know what's wrong with it, they are a time saver otherwise... I find chat for search is really helpful (as the article states)

You can ask the LLM to teach it to you step by step, and then you can validate it by doing it as well as you go, still quicker than learning it and not knowing how to debug it. Learning how something works is critical or it's far worse than technical debt.

Yes, I have a friend learning their first programming language with much assistance from ChatGPT and it's actually going really well.

Re: How I program with LLMs

#88
post #52

One interesting bit of context is that the author of this post is a legit world-class software engineer already (though probably too modest to admit it). Former staff engineer at Google and co-founder / CTO of Tailscale. He doesn't need LLMs. That he says LLMs make him more productive at all as a hands-on developer, especially around first drafts on a new idea, means a lot to me personally. His post reminds me of an…

> That he says LLMs make him more productive at all as a hands-on developer, especially around first drafts on a new idea, means a lot to me personally.

There is likely to be a great rift in how very talented people look at sharper tools.

I've seen the same division pop up with CNC machines, 3d printers, IDEs and now LLMs.

If you are good at doing something, you might find the new tool's output to be sub-par over what you can achieve yourself, but often the lower quality output comes much faster than you can generate.

That causes the people who are deliberate & precise about their process to hate the new tool completely - expressing in the actual code (or paint, or marks on wood) is much better than trying to explain it in a less precise language in the middle of it. The only exception I've seen is that engineering folks often use a blueprint & refine it on paper.

There's a double translation overhead which is wasteful if you don't need it.

If you have dealt with a new hire while being the senior of the pair, there's that familiar feeling of wanting to grab their keyboard instead of explaining how to build that regex - being able to do more things than you can explain or just having a higher bandwidth pipe into the actual task is a common sign of mastery.

The incrementalists on the other hand, tend to love the new tool as they tend to build 6 different things before picking what works the best, slowly iterating towards what they had in mind in the first place.

I got into this profession simply because I could Ctrl-Z to the previous step much more easily than my then favourite chemical engineering goals. In Chemistry, if you get a step wrong, you go to the start & start over. Plus even when things work, yield is just a pain there (prove it first, then you scale up ingredients etc).

Just from the name of sketch.dev, it appears that this author is of the 'sketch first & refine' model where the new tool just speeds up that loop of infinite refinement.

Re: How I program with LLMs

#89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can run Claude on both AWS and Google Cloud. I’m fairly certain they don’t share data, but would need to verify to be sure.

You can also run Llama 405B and the latest (huge) DeepSeek on your own hardware and get LLMs that trade blows with Claude and ChatGPT, while being fully isolated and offline if needed.

With Amazon Bedrock you can get an isolated serverless Claude or llama with a few clicks

Re: How I program with LLMs

#90
post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can ask the LLM to teach it to you step by step, and then you can validate it by doing it as well as you go, still quicker than learning it and not knowing how to debug it. Learning how something works is critical or it's far worse than technical debt.

Yes, I have a friend learning their first programming language with much assistance from ChatGPT and it's actually going really well.

Awesome, I wish more people knew about this compared to trying to do magic Harry Potter single prompt to do everything.
Post reply on HN