undefined | Better HN

0 pointsfoobarbecue9mo ago0 comments

I really can't tell if this is meant as a joke.

Anyway, I just wrote what I, personally, would type in a normal work day to accomplish this coding task.

0 comments

2 comments · 1 top-level

miyoji9mo ago· 1 in thread

It isn't a joke, you need the Kolmogorov complexity of the code that implements the feature, which has nothing to do with the fact that you're using someone else's solution. You may not have to think about all the code needed to parse a CSV, but someone did and that's a cost of the feature, whether you want to think about it or not.

Again, if someone else writes a 100,000 line function for you, and they wrap it in a "do_the_thing()" method, you calling it is still calling a 100,000 line function, the computer still has to run those lines and if something goes wrong, SOMEONE has to go digging in it. Ignoring the costs you don't pay is ridiculous.

foobarbecueOP9mo ago

We are comparing between a) asking an LLM to write code to parse a csv and b) writing code to parse a csv.

In both cases, they'll use a csv library, and a bajillion items of lower-level code. Application code is always standing on the shoulders of giants. Nobody is going to manually write assembly or machine code to parse a csv.

The original contention, which I was refuting, is that it's quicker and easier to use an LLM to write the python than it is to just write the python.

Kolmogorov complexity seems pretty irrelevant to this question.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse