this post was submitted on 18 Dec 2024
218 points (97.8% liked)

Programmer Humor

19809 readers
1095 users here now

Welcome to Programmer Humor!

This is a place where you can post jokes, memes, humor, etc. related to programming!

For sharing awful code theres also Programming Horror.

Rules

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 5 points 10 hours ago

that looks like a fork bomb

[–] Treczoks 5 points 13 hours ago

I don't speak elisp, but I speak regexp. Looks like the LLM speaks neither.

[–] thedeadwalking4242 2 points 11 hours ago

Try breaking each character in the string into its own token, it’ll have an easier time because it’ll actually know what the string is

[–] [email protected] 5 points 17 hours ago

That's a lot of dollars, ching ching ching

[–] [email protected] 82 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Management: Fuck it, ship it.


The people at the top honestly don't give a fuck if it barely works as long as it's an excuse to cut costs. In things like Customer Service, barely working is a bonus, because it makes customers give up before they try to get their issue solved.

[–] [email protected] 36 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (2 children)

You know what? If your management is telling you to use AI generated code to “go faster”, just go ahead and do it. But fork the repo first, in case you’re still around when they get fired and someone sensible says to put it back how it was before.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Git revert --hard no need to copy anything

[–] [email protected] 1 points 19 hours ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 2 points 5 hours ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 hours ago

If violence isn’t working, you’re not using enough violence

[–] [email protected] 3 points 18 hours ago

The problem is - you are far more likely to get fired when things go wrong :(

[–] kitnaht 57 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

I mean, I bet it failed at making a regex that worked much faster than you could fail at writing a regex that worked. Sounds like progress! :D

[–] [email protected] 27 points 1 day ago

I am always suspicious if a regex I write doesn't throw some form of pattern compilation error. It usually means I'm not even close to the correct solution.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 1 day ago (1 children)

As it learns from our data, no wonder it fucks up at regexps. They are the arcane knowledge not accessible to us mere mortals, nor to LLMs.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 day ago (1 children)

If you know even a little about how an LLM works it's obvious why regex is basically impossible for it. I suspect perl has similar problems, but no one is capable of actually validating that.

[–] ignotum 2 points 17 hours ago (1 children)

What do you mean it's impossible for it? I know how LLMs work but I don't know if any such limitations

Write me a regex that matches a letter repeated four times, followed by a 3 or 4 digit number

Here’s your regex: ([a-zA-Z])\1{3}\d{3,4}

[–] [email protected] 3 points 16 hours ago

They aren't context aware, it's using statistical probability. It can replicate things it's seen a lot of like a tutorial regex. It can't apply that to make a more complicated one. Regex in the wild isn't really standard at all, because it's rarely used to solve common problems. It has a bunch of random regexs from code it analyzed and will spit something out that looks similar.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 day ago

I love regex. I know, most don't, but I do. GPT/Claude can write some convincing code, but their regexes can be spotted a mile away.

[–] cm0002 17 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (22 children)

Just outta curiosity:

Full o1 model

"\\id:\[^]]+\\\\[^]]+\\\"

Claude 3.5 Haiku:

Never used elisp, no idea of any of this is right lmao

[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Claude at least created an elisp function that looks ok

[–] cm0002 2 points 1 day ago

3.5 sonnet might do a lot better, idk I'm on the free plan with Claude lmao

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

o1 without Markdown misformatting:

\\id:\\[^]]+\\\\\[^]]+\\\

No idea what the rectangles are supposed to be, I just copy-pasted it

[–] marcos 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

They are valid unicode points that your font doesn't know about.

... or at least they represent that, but I think there's a character that looks like one too.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 day ago

It's U+E001 from a Private Use Area. The UnicodePad app renders it as something between 鉮 and 鋁 (separate boxes stricken through; I wasn't able to find it even with Google Lens)

load more comments (20 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›