It doesn't matter if the LLM is not deterministic.. the OUTPUT of typed code is deterministic in the sense that it can be seen to be type safe, compiled, and run appropriate unit tests on it.

If I use two LLM's to create some chunk of code and they both do it slightly differently but they both compile and pass appropriate tests.. it honestly doesn't matter if the LLM itself is not deterministic in exactly what it's going to output.

I would also argue- doesn't that make sense? You give two human coders the same task and they are also going to come up with slightly different results.

We don't run our own unit tests on compiled code because it generally can be trusted. LLMs are an extraordinarily leaky abstraction.

Saying "as long as it works and tests pass" suggests that we can test for every possible scenario. We can't. And tests can be flawed on top of it. Which is why an LLM is no more a compiler than a human coder (as you say) is.