On Mon, Feb 2, 2026 at 10:17 AM Richard via Boost <boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:
[Please do not mail me a copy of your followup]
Andrey Semashev via Boost <boost@lists.boost.org> spake the secret code <6b77dc56-de64-4a9a-bedc-6191284b0ee0@gmail.com> thusly:
On 2 Feb 2026 18:38, Richard via Boost wrote:
If you, as a reviewer or reader, can't tell the difference between the product of that process and what I would've typed by hand, why do you care?
[...] The problem is, as I said in my reply, that the quality of the AI-generated code is often worse than that of the code written by a qualified human.
As I said: if you can't tell the difference, why do you care?
You turn around and say that you can tell the difference because you assert that the code is "often worse" than that written by a "qualified" human.
A point of qualification.. You also have the responsibility to prove that LLM produced code is at least as good as human produced code. And there has been research on how LLM produced code is not as good as human produced code (it also follows logically if you think about how LLMs are limited by their training inputs). I've mentioned some of that research in the Boost Slack channel. The quality of the end product depends on the human in the loop. And AFAIK Vinnie is being diligent in his methods. But that doesn't remove the need to externally verify. As with all code multiple perspectives yield better end results. -- -- René Ferdinand Rivera Morell -- Don't Assume Anything -- No Supongas Nada -- Robot Dreams - http://robot-dreams.net