I notice that language models are much better at programming than at writing. This is largely because, in programming, they have a closed feedback loop that allows them to find errors. Writing is much more complicated because the feedback is much more diffuse and delayed over time. In fact, it is often not well-defined.
Any conversation
๐๐ฎ๐ฐ ๐ ๐๐ฎ๐ฐ ๐ช๐ฏ ยท๐๐ฎ๐ฆ๐๐ฆ๐ ๐๐ฆ๐๐ฉ๐ ๐๐ฆ๐ ๐ข๐ฐ๐๐ง๐ฏ๐: ๐ฃ๐จ๐ ๐ฉ ๐๐ซ๐ค ยท๐ฆ๐๐๐ค๐ฆ๐ ๐ฏ ๐ฉ ๐๐ฒ (๐ฎ๐จ๐๐ฆ๐) ๐๐จ๐๐๐ผ๐๐ฑ, ๐ฏ๐ฌ ๐ ๐๐ต ๐จ ๐๐ฐ๐ ๐ฎ๐ด๐๐. ๐ค๐ณ๐๐ค๐ฐ ๐ฏ ๐๐ท๐๐ฐ ๐ฆ๐ฏ ๐๐ฆ๐ ๐ท๐๐ณ๐ฅ๐ฏ๐ฉ๐ค ๐ข๐จ๐๐ผ.
Three for three on British dishes this weekend: had a full English and a pie (rabbit) yesterday, now to do a beef roast. Lovely and cozy in this autumnal weather.
code quality is about coupling.
coupling is not a technical property of the code bytes.
code acquires its meaning in contact with the cultural environment, and coupling is about meaning.
two constants with no semantic relationship are nonetheless coupled in pragmatics if they refer to the same domain concept.
if your goal is to minimise the time integral of future work, you must understand your domain: it decides which lines will need changing.
to carve up a codebase is to carve up the world.
