zlacker

>>meetpa+(OP)
My frustration with using these models for programming in the past has largely been around their tendency to hallucinate APIs that simply don't exist. The Gemini 2.5 models, both pro and flash, seem significantly less susceptible to this than any other model I've tried.

There are still significant limitations, no amount of prompting will get current models to approach abstraction and architecture the way a person does. But I'm finding that these Gemini models are finally able to replace searches and stackoverflow for a lot of my day-to-day programming.

>>segpha+J4
> no amount of prompting will get current models to approach abstraction and architecture the way a person does

I find this sentiment increasingly worrisome. It's entirely clear that every last human will be beaten on code design in the upcoming years (I am not going to argue if it's 1 or 5 years away, who cares?)

I wished people would just stop holding on to what amounts to nothing, and think and talk more about what can be done in a new world. We need good ideas and I think this could be a place to advance them.

>>jstumm+jH
I'm confused by your comment. It seems like you didn't really provide a retort to the parent's comment about bad architecture and abstraction from LLMs.

FWIW, I think you're probably right that we need to adapt, but there was no explanation as to _why_ you believe that that's the case.

>>jjice+8J
I think they are pointing out that the advantage humans have has been chipped away little by little and computers winning at coding is inevitable on some timeline. They are also suggesting that perhaps the GP is being defensive.