undefined | Better HN

0 pointsryandrake5mo ago0 comments

I've found it to be pretty hit-or-miss with C++ in general, but it's really, REALLY bad at 3D graphics code. I've tried to use it to port an OpenGL project to SDL3_GPU, and it really struggled. It would confidently insist that the code it wrote worked, when all you had to do was run it and look at the output to see a blank screen.

0 comments

3 comments · 1 top-level

Wowfunhappy5mo ago· 2 in thread

I hope I’m not committing a faux pas by saying this—and please feel free to tell me that I’m wrong—but I imagine a human who has been blind since birth would also struggle to build 3D graphics code.

The Claude models are technically multi-modal, but IME the vision side of the equation is really lacking. As a result, Claude is quite good at reasoning about logic, and it can build e.g. simpler web pages where the underlying html structure is enough to work with, but it’s much worse at tasks that inherently require seeing.

ryandrakeOP5mo ago

Yea, for obvious reasons, it seems to be best at code that transforms data: text/binary input to text/binary output. And where the logic can be tracked and verified at runtime with sufficient (text) logging. In other words, it's much better close loop than open loop. I tried to help it by prompting it to please take a screen capture of its output to verify functionality, but it seems LLMs aren't quite ready for that yet.

mattarm5mo ago

They work much better off a test that must pass. That they can “see”. Without it they are just making up some other acceptance criteria.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse