Necessarily, LLM output that works isn't gibberish.

The code that LLM outputs, has worked well enough to learn from since the initial launch of ChatGPT. This even though back then you might have to repeatedly say "continue" because it would stop in the middle of writing a function.

▲ inferiorhuman 2 days ago | parent [-]

  Necessarily, LLM output that works isn't gibberish.

Hardly. Poorly conjured up code can still work.

	▲	ben_w 2 days ago \| parent [-]
		"Gibberish" code is necessary code which doesn't work. Even in the broader use of the term: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gibberish Especially in this context, if a mystery box solves a problem for me, I can look at the solution and learn something from that solution, c.f. how paper was inspired by watching wasps at work. Even the abject failures can be interesting, though I find them more helpful for forcing my writing to be easier to understand.