←back to thread

FAWK: LLMs can write a language interpreter

(martin.janiczek.cz)
207 points todsacerdoti | 2 comments | 21 Nov 25 10:28 UTC | HN request time: 0.392s | source
Show context
TeodorDyakov ◴[21 Nov 25 12:17 UTC] No.46003809[source]▶
So you are using a tool to help you write code because you dont enjoy coding in order to make a tool used for coding(a computer language). Why?
replies(3): >>46003825 #>>46003877 #>>46004030 #
killerstorm ◴[21 Nov 25 12:26 UTC] No.46003877[source]▶
Coding has many aspects: conceptual understanding of problem domain, design, decomposition, etc, and then typing code, debugging. Can you imagine person might enjoy conceptual part more and skip over some typing exercises?
replies(1): >>46003914 #
1. bgwalter ◴[21 Nov 25 12:34 UTC] No.46003914[source]▶
The whole blog post does not mention the word "grammar". As presented, it is examples based and the LLM spit out its plagiarized code and beat it into shape until the examples passed.

We do not know whether the implied grammar is conflict free. We don't know anything.

It certainly does not look like enjoying the conceptual part.

replies(1): >>46004715 #
2. killerstorm ◴[21 Nov 25 14:03 UTC] No.46004715[source]▶
Many established programming languages have grammatical warts, so your bar for LLMs is higher than "industry expert".

E.g. C++ `std::vector<std::vector<int>> v;`. The language defined by top fucking experts, with a 1000-page spec.