A good tool is easily documentable, and then usable with said documentation.
A good tool has perfect repeatability
It is easy to predict the outcome of using a good tool.
Current LLMs have neither. For all the user knows, it’s a black box that takes input and poops out output. You can only steer the output after some output has already been given.
I think we disagree on the nature of a tool. Or maybe I am thinking about more than a “tool”, but not using the appropriate word for it.
Image riding a very fast horse. There is no perfect repeatability, it might veer off, or react to something you didn’t see, but a good rider would probably manage to arrive at the intended destination. I think I view it the same with agentic coding.
Now, I agree a horse is not a tool, and that’s why I mentioned that my language is perhaps a bit imprecise. (I guess you could even call it an agent.) But maybe an “instrument” or an “implement” fits, although that’s a bit cold wording for a horse in general, as they have other qualities, as being cute etc… But I think you get my point.
I very much think LLMs can fall under the description of “useful implement for coding” today. But I do think it is a very poor knowledge retrieval implement. In fact I sucks for all these one-off questions, I my opinion.
I think the more interesting discussion is about how these AI companies consolidate power even more, how they steal data, how they pollute like crazy. But I think people who dismiss their use in coding perhaps view LLMs more like a flashlight and less like a very fast horse moving you from A to B.
Don’t forget we are talking about a tool.
A good tool is easily documentable, and then usable with said documentation. A good tool has perfect repeatability It is easy to predict the outcome of using a good tool.
Current LLMs have neither. For all the user knows, it’s a black box that takes input and poops out output. You can only steer the output after some output has already been given.
I think we disagree on the nature of a tool. Or maybe I am thinking about more than a “tool”, but not using the appropriate word for it.
Image riding a very fast horse. There is no perfect repeatability, it might veer off, or react to something you didn’t see, but a good rider would probably manage to arrive at the intended destination. I think I view it the same with agentic coding.
Now, I agree a horse is not a tool, and that’s why I mentioned that my language is perhaps a bit imprecise. (I guess you could even call it an agent.) But maybe an “instrument” or an “implement” fits, although that’s a bit cold wording for a horse in general, as they have other qualities, as being cute etc… But I think you get my point.
I very much think LLMs can fall under the description of “useful implement for coding” today. But I do think it is a very poor knowledge retrieval implement. In fact I sucks for all these one-off questions, I my opinion.
I think the more interesting discussion is about how these AI companies consolidate power even more, how they steal data, how they pollute like crazy. But I think people who dismiss their use in coding perhaps view LLMs more like a flashlight and less like a very fast horse moving you from A to B.