Andreas Klebinger via ghc-devs <[email protected]> writes: > Hello Devs, >
... > *My plan is to aggressively request improvement of prose during MR > review going forward.* > Yes, this seems very sensible. > Accepting bad prose is worse for maintainers because they have to read > texts three times to understand what is going on. It's worse for > agents because it fills context windows with irrelevant facts and > pointless trivia that poison their reasoning ability. > > It's just worse, and it takes little effort to fix. > Absolutely. > But maybe I'm alone in feeling this way. If everyone else is happy to > read Opus text output all, or at least to have opus read opus > output all day long. Then I will surrender this fight and move to > another hill to die on. > For what it's worth, I agree that this is a hill to die on. While I am gradually growing more comfortable with LLM generated code, LLMs are truly awful at producing readable prose. The effort of reading and rewriting Notes and comments produced by an LLM will pay dividends in maintainability in the long run. Cheers, - Ben
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ ghc-devs mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
