|
|
|
|
|
by rakejake
1187 days ago
|
|
The compiler is a deterministic tool (even undefined behaviour is documented). So you can spend some time understanding the abstractions provided to you by your compiler and then you know exactly what it is going to do with your code. What is the equivalent of this for LLMs? Is there anyway generative models can give a guarantee that this prompt will 100% translate to this assembly? As far as I understand, no. And the way autoregressive models are built I don't think this is possible. I agree that they are useful for one-offs like you said, and their ability to tailor the solution for your problem (as opposed to reading multiple answers on stackoverflow and then piecing it yourself) is quite deadly, but for anything that is even slightly consequential, you are going to have to read everything it generates. I just can't figure out how it integrates into my workflow. |
|