←back to thread

207 points todsacerdoti | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
runeks ◴[] No.46005656[source]
I think it would be super interesting to see how the LLM handles extending/modifying the code it has written. Ie. adding/removing features, in order to simulate the life cycle of a normal software project. After all, LLM-produced code would only be of limited use if it’s worse at adding new features than humans are.

As I understand, this would require somehow “saving the state” of the LLM, as it exists after the last prompt — since I don’t think the LLM can arrive at the same state by just being fed the code it has written.

replies(3): >>46005866 #>>46005888 #>>46010197 #
1. Philpax ◴[] No.46005866[source]
I described my experience using Claude Code Web to vibe-code a language interpreter here [0], with a link to the closed PRs [1].

As it turns out, you don't really need to "save the state"; with decent-enough code and documentation (both of which the LLM can write), it can figure out what needs to be done and go from there. This is obviously not perfect - and a human developer with a working memory could get to the problem faster - but its reorientation process is fast enough that you generally don't have to worry about it.

[0]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46005813 [1]: https://github.com/philpax/perchance-interpreter/pulls?q=is%...