> This leads to the point: in general do we care about this non-determinism?
> Most of the time, no we don't.
well that’s a sweeping generalisation. i think this is a better generalised answer to your question.
> It depends on the problem we’re trying solve and the surrounding conditions and constraints.
software engineering is primarily about understanding the problem space.
are 99% of us building a pacemaker? no. but that doesn’t mean we can automatically make the leap to assuming a set of tools known for being non-deterministic are good enough for our use case.
it depends.
> Once you accept that the next stage is accepting that most of the time the non-deterministic output of an LLM is good enough!
the next stage is working with whatever tool(s) is/are best suited to solve the problem.
and that depends on the problem you are solving.
> are 99% of us building a pacemaker? no. but that doesn’t mean we can automatically make the leap to assuming a set of tools known for being non-deterministic are good enough for our use case.
This seems irrelevant?
Either way hopefully you test the pacemaker code comprehensively!
That's pretty much the best case for llm generated code: comprehensive tests of the desired behaviour.