←back to thread

925 points dmitrybrant | 2 comments | | HN request time: 0.078s | source
Show context
rvz ◴[] No.45163702[source]
No tests whatsoever. This isn't getting close to being merged into mainline and it will stay out-of-tree for a long time.

That's even before taking on the brutal linux kernel mailing lists for code review explaining what that C code does which could be riddled with bugs that Claude generated.

No thanks and no deal.

replies(4): >>45163791 #>>45163798 #>>45163818 #>>45166428 #
1. kelnos ◴[] No.45166428[source]
> No tests whatsoever.

Test coverage between subsystems in the Linux kernel varies widely. I don't think a lack of tests would prevent inclusion.

> No thanks and no deal.

I mean, now we have a driver for this old hardware that runs on a modern kernel, which we didn't before. I imagine you don't even have that hardware, so why do you care if someone else gets some use out of it?

The negativity here in many of these comments is just staggering. I've only recently started adopting LLM coding tools, and I still remain a skeptic about the whole thing overall, but... damn. Seems like most people aren't thinking critically and are just regurgitating "durrrr LLMs bad" over and over.

replies(1): >>45167452 #
2. cmpxchg8b ◴[] No.45167452[source]
Yes, the negativity is infuriating. This is the mindset that is going to get left behind. I'm no LLM maximalist but they clearly have their uses in the right context and the right hands.