For one thing it’s statically typed and has many fewer foot guns than Python, so the llm-produced code is more likely to do what you expect.

Go is statically typed but the type system leaves much to be desired.

Go’s benefit are primarily around simplicity, readability, and concurrency.

>Go is statically typed but the type system leaves much to be desired.

Not that much. Looking at Rust or Haskell complexity, I don't really desire it.

Python has much better type system than Go, I don’t know what you’re on. With Trio it has a better async capabilities too.

Haha thank you! This had been mildly bothering me for a while actually.

I have been writing my own custom software for myself for over 30 years. But in the last six months I have written a lot more of it because the language models make it so much faster and easier to do so.

It’s not that the calculator was more than what students need, it’s that even for what it was the TI83/84 was way overpriced. It could have been like $20 at the scale they were produced.

This is why you have modern circuit breakers.

In my experience having different serving paths for dev vs production is a recipe for annoying issues. I try to make dev as similar to prod as possible.

I’m not sure, I don’t dismiss fcgi outright here, I find the arguments for it compelling (not a huge fan of http for many reasons) but it has to be really worth it to break the consistency of using http everywhere.

If you want your dev environment to be as similar to prod as possible, and you use a proxy in prod, then you should use a proxy in dev also. I was presenting a solution to someone who doesn't want to do that.

I think perhaps I was unclear. I don’t mean the entire dev environment should mirror prod (although it’s great if you can do this for end to end testing). I just mean it’s desirable if the process you’re working on operates the same way in dev as in prod.

I think it’s helpful to try to use words that more precisely describe how the LLM works. For instance, “intent” ascribes a will to the process. Instead I’d say an LLM has an “orientation”, in that through prompting you point it in a particular direction in which it’s most likely to continue.

Presumably you’re also using a browser to view this web page. There have also been vulnerabilities in that. You have to draw a line somewhere.

Yes and if they copy and paste code they don’t understand then they should disclose that in the commit message too!

It’s a quote from the movie Kindergarten Cop.