| ▲ | applfanboysbgon 6 hours ago | |||||||||||||
No. This conveys a fundamental misunderstanding of how anything pertaining to programming works. This will never happen, ever. For example, take...
vs. a plausible illustration of how it might be compiled down to machine code...
The latter now takes up 10x as many tokens (= 10x the cost/time, + context penalties), and is now architecture-specific, impossible to apply non-brittle program-wide optimizations to, etc. There is absolutely zero reason to ever have the LLM act as a compiler no matter how fast it is. Even if you believe LLMs will reach a state where they can actually generate good code at this level, you would be better off having them generate the compiler they would use. | ||||||||||||||
| ▲ | evmaki 5 hours ago | parent | next [-] | |||||||||||||
For what it's worth, this theoretical LLM-based compiler would probably generate LLVM or some other intermediate representation rather than platform-specific machine code. | ||||||||||||||
| ▲ | bakies 6 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | |||||||||||||
I mean you're right, but what about a different tokenizer and some guardrails... trained on compiled code... I just learned that gpt-5.6 will talk to you in base64 without tool calls so maybe it's possible. | ||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||