I've been using LLM to help me write code for a little while but you do have to watch carefully. Sometimes they forget things, reformat beautifully readable code to less intelligible but likely still functional code. Other times they are plain wrong. eg a=b; if(a!=b);In a recent video by Rob Braxman who is experimenting with a LLM inhouse, he observed if the model overflowed the number of available levels, it would forget the initial assumptions and then produce erroneous results. I suspect the mass market models may not allocate many levels to users like us. Still, it has allowed me to do things I otherwise couldn't. Eg deep Linux internals bash scripting, use an unfamiliar API, syntax check my code, write a listener service for an API hook, use the BTRFS quick copy feature to instantly replicate 5 gb files (that one I didn't even know existed). LLM Is just another tool, not a replacement to a human. I find its like having a conversation with an experienced consultant. Its not to be relied on totally. But regarding LinuxCNC, it can't be relied on too much because a few times its quoted my public content as being one of the sources it relied upon. I think you just have to trust LinuxCNC developers use LLM the way I do. As a guide and tutor, not an authoritative source. Rod Webster
On 2026-03-20 03:31, Bertho Stultiens <[email protected]> wrote: > On 3/19/26 5:06 PM, Greg C wrote: > >> FWIW, you do not need a PhD to see the problems in the LinuxCNC code > >> base. Just the common sense of a reasonably versed programmer will > >> detect over 90% of the problems at first or second glance. > > I echo Andy's sentiment. I am not a software engineer. I am a mechanical > > engineer with a love for CNC machines and writing code as a hobby. I've > > come light years from when I started, but I still have a ton to learn. > > I do understand that most of you are from a completely different field > of expertise. That makes it sometimes harder, but also, it allows us to > bring different perspectives to the mix. Always good to have to explain > yourself as a reflection on what you're doing as a reality check. > > Programming is not easy and hard work, as most of you "non-programmers" > (sorry) have found out by now. ;-) Using tools to help you is usually > fine if done with thought, but that cannot replace knowledge, experience > and wisdom. Actually, I'd be mostly fine with people using common sense, > but that seems often to get turned off when using LLMs (and may even be > mutually exclusive for repeat users). > > This sentiment is exactly the same for /any/ field of work. I don't > think any of you would blindly allow LLM generated machine settings to > be used. I guess ChatBotLLM could confidently tell you to put your > (remaining) fingers right under the spindle to secure the plate while > making holes (and then racing over the rest of your hand for completeness). > > And, on a side note, I'm not a software engineer either. I'm a computer > engineer (primarily work on the interface between hardware and > software). But that does give me (some) advantages because programming > has always been an integral part of that work. > > -- > Greetings Bertho > > (disclaimers are disclaimed) > > > > _______________________________________________ > Emc-developers mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-developers _______________________________________________ Emc-developers mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-developers
