> other side???

> We don’t have to look at assembly, because a compiler produces the same result every time.

This is technically true in the narrowest possible sense and practically misleading in almost every way that matters. Anyone who's had a bug that only manifests at -O2, or fought undefined behavior in C that two compilers handle differently, or watched MSVC and GCC produce meaningfully different codegen from identical source, or hit a Heisenbug that disappears when you add a printf ... the "deterministic compiler" is doing a LOT of work in that sentence that actual compilers don't deliver on.

Also what's with the "sides" and "camps?" ... why would you not keep your identity small here? Why define yourself as a {pro, anti} AI person so early? So weird!

▲

hakunin 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

You just described deterministic behavior. Bugs are also deterministic. You don’t get different bugs every time you compile the same code the same way. With LLMs you do.

Re: “other side” - I’m quoting the grandparent’s framing.

▲

danny_codes 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

GCC is, I imagine, several orders of magnitude mor deterministic than an LLM.

▲

hakunin 3 hours ago | parent [-]

It’s not _more_ deterministic. It’s deterministic, period. The LLMs we use today are simply not.

	▲	philipswood an hour ago \| parent [-]
		Build systems may be deterministic in the narrow sense you use, but significant extra effort is required to make them reproducible. Engineering in the broader sense often deals with managing the outputs of variable systems to get known good outcomes to acceptable tolerances. Edit: added second paragraph