Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Jim Jackson Newsgroups: comp.misc Subject: Re: People Are Googling Fake Sayings To See AI Overviews Explain Them Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2025 13:23:16 -0000 (UTC) Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 29 Message-ID: References: <86jz78h4in.fsf@example.com> Injection-Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2025 15:23:17 +0200 (CEST) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="9d051b8265b14796d66bea7d77242778"; logging-data="1964881"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19U8MEstYSCGo3u03+EBKE62zruMd0wV4g=" User-Agent: slrn/1.0.3 (Linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:kJRkZXyUCbkA2DJmiOAk0H0Ro4E= Bytes: 2337 On 2025-04-29, Jim Jackson wrote: > On 2025-04-29, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote: >> On Mon, 28 Apr 2025 12:42:26 -0000 (UTC), Jim Jackson wrote: >> >>> Mind you, way back in the day I saw degree student's software that >>> surely looked like the students were hullucinating when they wrote it >>> :-) >> >> I wonder how that can be, assuming the code actually works. > > Who said anything about working? > Actually it probably did for at least one path through the code! The one they actually tested. But this one path went round the houses to get there. :-) There is a technique to programming where, when it fails to do the job, the "coder" (and I use the term loosely) does an edit or add "one thing", recompile, test, rinse repeat cycle. Never delete anything, it might be important. Code review - don't yer just love it. Do AI bots ever compile or run their code? Silly question. Could we get another AI to do code review? Actually not a silly question. >> I knew someone, back in undergrad days, who was a good programmer (a few >> years senior to me), but a lousy speller. I remember seeing one of his >> programs reporting that the user had typed an ???illegial charector??? ...