Don’t compilers have some guarantee of behaviours? I.e even if you don’t know exactly what instructions and order the compiler generates there is a guarantee that it is computationally/mathematically equivalent to the statements you wrote. Otherwise it would be a pretty terrible compiler. That’s a pretty big jump to writing instructions you don’t understand, since LLMs can’t make the same guarantees about a prompt/request.
What was the non-determinism in compilers? Honest question. Like, where does it comes from?
If you had a bug in a compiler, and a code that caused it, would it, for the same input and architecture only show some of the time? Does it included randomness in how it handles output?
Being bug-ridden is not the same as non-determinstic, if you can reproduce the bug everywhere and thus fix it, so I’m honestly curious where would the non-determinism of compilers come from.
Frankly, compilers come pretty close to reaching the necessary complexity to be practically non-deterministic; anyone who had never spent days banging their head against code that works perfectly with debug enabled but fails utterly when compiled with release optimisations, but only when two logically entirely unrelated pieces of code happen to be written in a particular order, and then only if interrupts are enabled on the target… Well, anyone who hasn’t been through that has no business calling themselves a software engineer - and certainly no business telling other software engineers what tools they are allowed to use.
that is still deterministic… you don’t understand what deterministic means.
go ahead and show us an llm that is deterministic with a parameter passed to the inference engine. I’ll wait.
Don’t compilers have some guarantee of behaviours? I.e even if you don’t know exactly what instructions and order the compiler generates there is a guarantee that it is computationally/mathematically equivalent to the statements you wrote. Otherwise it would be a pretty terrible compiler. That’s a pretty big jump to writing instructions you don’t understand, since LLMs can’t make the same guarantees about a prompt/request.
Yes, they are deterministic. LLMs are not.
I am curious about the downvotes; what I said is factual. LLMs use random numbers in deciding output, so they are not deterministic.
deleted by creator
What was the non-determinism in compilers? Honest question. Like, where does it comes from?
If you had a bug in a compiler, and a code that caused it, would it, for the same input and architecture only show some of the time? Does it included randomness in how it handles output?
Being bug-ridden is not the same as non-determinstic, if you can reproduce the bug everywhere and thus fix it, so I’m honestly curious where would the non-determinism of compilers come from.
deleted by creator
that is still deterministic… you don’t understand what deterministic means.
go ahead and show us an llm that is deterministic with a parameter passed to the inference engine. I’ll wait.
deleted by creator
Anyone claiming to do “real programming” shouldn’t be listened to. It’s incredibly clear you don’t know what deterministic means.