The hate this is getting is not justified, it's a very cool idea. I tried the GPT you created and it is impressively consistent.<p>Why do you think that GPT4 so consistently respects these instructions?<p>It's not perfect, though -- I asked it to explain a bit more about functions and it slipped. Its usage examples had function invocations in the form "//f <function_name> <*args>"<p>I asked it about this and it responded:<p><pre><code> In reply to: 3
Thank you for pointing out the discrepancy. You are correct. According to
the //N syntax rules, functions should be invoked using the format
"//<function name>," not "//f <function name>." The "//f" prefix is used for
defining a new function, not for invoking it. Here's the corrected way to
invoke the functions I mentioned earlier:
</code></pre>
Anyway, I don't think I would use this exactly the way that you define it, but I really like the idea of basically defining macros to the conversation and invoking them using a special syntax like this. Will have to see if it sticks or not, but it's a valuable idea.<p>I'm curious - do you know how custom instructions work? A lot of people are implying that the custom instructions simply get prepended to each message, but is that true? Or are they fed into the model as context in a more opaque manner?