| Ultimately, every AI thing I've tried in this era seems to want to make me happy, even if it's wrong, instead of helping me. I describe it like "an eager intern who can summarize a 20-min web search session instantly, but ultimately has insufficient insight to actually help you". (Note to current interns: I'm mostly describing myself some years ago; you may be fantastic so don't take it personally!) Most of my interactions with it via text prompt or builtin code suggestions go like this: 1. Me: I want to do X in C++. Show me how to do it only using stdlib components (no external libraries). 2. LLM: Gladly! Here is solution X 3. Me: Remove the undefined behavior from foo() and fix the methods that call it 4. LLM: Sure! Here it is (produces solution X again) 5. Me: No you need to remove the use of uninitialized variables as the out parameters. 6. LLM: Oh certainly! Here is the correct solution (produces a completely different solution that also has issues) 7. Me: No go back to the first one etc For the ones that suggest code, it can at least suggest some very simple boilerplate very easily (e.g. gtest and gmock stuff for C++), but asking it to do anything more significant is a real gamble. Often I end up spending more time scrutinizing the suggested code than writing a version of it myself. |
AI is just AI. You can upload a reference file for it to summarize, but it's not going to be able to look at the structure of the file and use that as a template for future reports. You'll still have to spoon-feed it constantly.