TE
科技回声
首页24小时热榜最新最佳问答展示工作
GitHubTwitter
首页

科技回声

基于 Next.js 构建的科技新闻平台,提供全球科技新闻和讨论内容。

GitHubTwitter

首页

首页最新最佳问答展示工作

资源链接

HackerNews API原版 HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 科技回声. 版权所有。

In Theory: Self-Correcting Software

16 点作者 ingigauti8 个月前

2 条评论

jph8 个月前
Plang and similar logic languages are compelling when combined with AI large language models plus anti-fragile programming techniques. The article&#x27;s example shows goal-driven code that knows how to ask the LLM for how to improve the implementations, and also the goal planning.<p>However, Plang is unusual because it requires up-front payment to try. For example, the main website says &quot; On first build you will be ask to pre-purchase credits&quot; and &quot;Each code line incurs usually between $0.005 - $0.035 fee via LLM&quot;. I respect developers who ask for money. At the same time, it would be great to have a lower-quality local-first way to try Plang.
评论 #41447537 未加载
ropejumper8 个月前
The syntax was intriguing, so I checked out their github page: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;PLangHQ&#x2F;">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;PLangHQ&#x2F;</a><p>First example that caught me eyes:<p><pre><code> CreateUser - Make sure %password% and %email% is not empty - Hash %password%, write to %hashedPassword% - Insert into users, %hashedPassword%, %email% - Post, create user in MailChimp Bearer %Settings.MailChimpApi% %email% - Create bearer token from %email%, write to %bearer% - Write %bearer% to web response </code></pre> All well and good, but then they compare it with more conventional languages:<p>&gt; These 6 steps replace over 100+ lines of C#&#x2F;Java&#x2F;Typescript code, or if you do clean code programming, dozens of files.<p>Very bold statement, let&#x27;s look at the liked code: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;gist.github.com&#x2F;ingig&#x2F;491ac9b13d65f40cc24ee5aed0408be3" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;gist.github.com&#x2F;ingig&#x2F;491ac9b13d65f40cc24ee5aed0408b...</a><p>The reason why your plang code is shorter is simply because you&#x27;re defining a bunch of extra helper functions. Also because you&#x27;re implicitly declaring those arguments because the names are not bound.<p>This is exactly what I look for whenever I see a natural programming language. It&#x27;s a very common argument to make and it never ceases to amaze me how blatantly deceptive it is.<p>I am still interested in other parts of it (such as the fact that it&#x27;s a logic language) but this leaves a bad taste in my mouth. There&#x27;s a lot of similar hyperbole, too
评论 #41447514 未加载