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
I definitely get more use out of Gemini Pro than other models I've tried, but it's still very prone to bullshitting.

I asked it a complicated question about the Scala ZIO framework that involved subtyping, type inference, etc. - something that would definitely be hard to figure out just from reading the docs. The first answer it gave me was very detailed, very convincing and very wrong. Thankfully I noticed it myself and was able to re-prompt it and I got an answer that is probably right. So it was useful in the end, but only because I realised that the first answer was nonsense.

>>Tainno+il
The fact that SO much is only discovered after the fact by asking it "Are you sure?" is just insane

There has to be some kind of recursive error checking thing, or something

>>alex11+ID1
I did a bit more than "are you sure", though. I said "I don't think X is right because ..." (after reading the type signature of some function and thinking through what would happen). That seemed to lead it into the right direction.