| ▲ | camgunz 2 hours ago | |||||||||||||
I'm not impressed: - if you're not passing SQLite's open test suite, you didn't build SQLite - this is a "draw the rest of the owl" scenario; in order to transform this into something passing the suite, you'd need an expert in writing databases These projects are misnamed. People didn't build counterstrike, a browser, a C compiler, or SQLite solely with coding agents. You can't use them for that purpose--like, you can't drop this in for maybe any use case of SQLite. They're simulacra (slopulacra?)--their true use is as a prop in a huge grift: tricking people (including, and most especially, the creators) into thinking this will be an economical way to build complex software products in the future. | ||||||||||||||
| ▲ | 9dev an hour ago | parent | next [-] | |||||||||||||
Well--given a full copy of the SQLite test suite, I'm pretty sure it'd get there eventually. I agree that most of these show-off projects are just prop pieces, but that's kind of the point: Demonstrate it's technically possible to do the thing, not actually doing the thing, because that'd have diminishing returns for the demonstration. Still, the idea of setting a swarm of agents to a task, and, given a suitable test suite, have them build a compliant implementation, is sound in itself. | ||||||||||||||
| ▲ | gf000 an hour ago | parent | prev [-] | |||||||||||||
Also, the very idea is flawed. These are open-source projects and the code is definitely part of the training data. | ||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||