But it also feels way more like a modernized version of those "UML To Code" Generators from the early 2000 rather than the "magic AI" that MS and Google are trying to market.

▲

the_duke 11 hours ago | parent [-]

I'd disagree with that, if given enough compute LLMs can have impressive capabilities in finding bugs and implementing new logic, if guided right.

It's hit or miss at the moment, but it's definitely way more than "UML code generators".

▲

yvdriess 10 hours ago | parent [-]

It's not the same, but boy it sure does rhyme.

Typical prose in late 90's early 00s: Designing the right UML meta-schema and UML diagram will generate a bug-free source code of the program, enabling even non-programmers to create applications and business logic. Programs can check the UML diagram beforehand for logic errors, prove security and more.

	▲	thunky 8 hours ago \| parent [-]
		I never used those so correct me if I'm wrong but those UML tools were more of a one way street: diagram -> code. You couldn't point it at an existing codebase and get anything of value from it, or get it to review pull requests, or generate docs. And even for what it was meant for, it didn't help you with the design and architecture. You still had to be the architect and tell the tool what to do vs the opposite with LLMs, where you tell it what you want but not how to shape it (in theory).