Ok, but there is no reason to bake it into the TS scripts. You could write the python scripts and package them using standard tools. In my experience only an LLM would do that, since it makes sense to generate the code and templates to insert in one go. However, if a human were to do it, the python scripts would be their own files and they would be bundled / read in as strings when/as required. A gigantic lump of text in a string makes no sense in human paradigms, even if it makes perfect sense for an LLM to do it. For humans it is incredibly hostile to update and maintain.
As a side note, without looking it up, on your device, what is the process for typing an emdash?
While you are not wrong about this not being the wisest choice, i have seen it done before countless times already long before llms arrived. So i don‘t think it‘s such a clear sign of intense llm usage as you make it out to be.
Fair point I agree embedding code as strings isn’t ideal. I did it mainly to make npx create-llm portable without needing a Python setup during scaffolding. Definitely open to improving that happy to refactor if you have suggestions.
That makes zero sense. Am I even speaking with a natural person right now?!? Your comments sound like llm bullshit and everything about this project reeks of it as well, from code to readme.
It makes sense to me. its great to see tools like create-llm which help to kickstart llm development without spending lots of time putting low level stuffs
Tools like that already exist. Several of them, and all of them made with a far greater level of care and quality. This project is not maintainable in it's current state and takes more work to get to a maintainable point than already actively maintained projects.
Bro is angry about using llm to write code instead of being happy about a working code that makes it extremely easy for anyone to build their own nano gpt's.
LLM's are just the next evolution that assist you with coding tasks... similar to w3schools => blogs => stackoverflow, and now => llm's.
There's absolutely nothing wrong with using them. The problem is people who use them without reviewing their outputs.
> problem is people who use without reviewing outputs
the problem here is there is no reason to beleive OP reviewed or even fully understands the code. There is plenty of evidence of OP lying.
All in all best case scenario is we have a codebase made by someone dishonest and incompetant, and at worst it is plausible there is an intentional effort to obfuscated the codebase in an effort to slip people malware.
the entire thing stinks, and cannot be trusted. It deserves (oweing the dishonesty) a rather strong negative response and nothing more.
As a side note, without looking it up, on your device, what is the process for typing an emdash?