[frereit]

I'm honestly surprised at the relatively positive reception to this. While there isn't any problem with the code shown, the same effect couldn've probably been achieved with a few well thought out shortcuts in any IDE (delete outerHTML of svg tag, add new tag, add attributes). The only "more complex" output that is shown is the specification that CW produces, which literally contains an error in the first line ("Sp<logo>ral").

Moving on to the complex task, the author simply hand-waves "this isn't good yet but surely it will be". No evidence is given as to _why_ there should be any expectation of LLMs getting there.

And the perceived benefit of discovering that their idea of the more complex task was not thought out enough did not come from the LLM, it came from the author itself. They may as well have spoken to ELIZA or a rubber duck.

What am I missing?

[tymscar]

Youre missing the koolaid. I do wonder if people who cut too much slack to this sort of tech are just doing it because they’re scared of going against the grain. Sort of a vicious cycle.

[doug_durham]

This is a pretty reductive argument. I'm not quite sure what "a few well thought out IDE shortcuts" are. I've never experienced an IDE that allows any kind of sophisticated "shortcut" that will write arbitrary code.