139
Which language you wish would really grow and reach mainstream adoption?
(programming.dev)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 01 Nov 2023
139 points (96.0% liked)
Programming
17135 readers
183 users here now
Welcome to the main community in programming.dev! Feel free to post anything relating to programming here!
Cross posting is strongly encouraged in the instance. If you feel your post or another person's post makes sense in another community cross post into it.
Hope you enjoy the instance!
Rules
Rules
- Follow the programming.dev instance rules
- Keep content related to programming in some way
- If you're posting long videos try to add in some form of tldr for those who don't want to watch videos
Wormhole
Follow the wormhole through a path of communities !webdev@programming.dev
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
A compiler has mostly fixed rules for translation. The English language often is ambiguous and there are many ways to implement something based on a verbal description.
Programming by using the ai as a "compiler" would likely lead to many bugs that will be hard to impossible to trace without knowing the underlying implementation. But hitting compile again may lead to an accidental correct implementation and you'd be none the wiser why the test suddenly passes.
It's ok as an assistant to generate boilerplate code, and warn you about some bugs / issues. Maybe a baseline implementation.
But by the time you've exactly described what and how you want it you may as well just write some higher level code.
Some compilers are simple, while some are complicated. An AI compiler would of course be very complicated. However, it still would have "fixed rules". It's just that these rules would be decided by itself. If u r a software dev, u r also an English-to-xyz-language-compiler. You do what your client tells u to do more or less correctly, right? Junior devs do what senior devs tell them to do kinda correctly, right? An AI compiler would be the same thing.
Bugs would be likely if your AI compiler was dumb. The probability of bugs would reduce drastically if ur AI compiler was trained more/on better data.
That is the state of AI today. What you are describing are the capabilities of current AI models. However, I cannot see how this is a criticism of the idea of AI compilers themselves.
Again. The smarter your model, the more you can abstract your stuff.