|
|
|
|
|
by chaffroomba
601 days ago
|
|
Problem I'm having as a developer with LLM documentation is their reliability, or rather lack of it. Every time there is an assertation I end up having to double-confirm it because they tend to be wrong as often as they're right. Reading imaginary hallucinated documentation is just about as useful as zero documentation. While I could keep doing this for the rest of my life, my employer doesen't really appreciate the extra expense. A technical writer is much, much cheaper than the dozens of developers trying to confirm the docs. |
|
no, it's worse. it's closer to reading outdated documentation that outright lies and gives examples that don't work, and will cause you to waste hours/days learning things that aren't relevant to the api anymore.