[hansmayer]

> That's exactly what they do for me - especially since the November model releases (GPT-5.1, Opus 4.5).

I mean it's inherently impossible, given the statistical nature of LLMs, so I am not sure are you claiming this out of ignorance or other interests, but again, what you claim is impossible due to the very nature of LLMs.

[lunar_mycroft]

It's impossible for human developers too. Natural language descriptions of a program are either much more painful and time consuming to write than the code they describe, or contain some degree of ambiguity which the thing translating the description into code has to resolve (and the probability of the resolution the entity writing the description would have chosen and the one entity translating it into code chose matching perfectly approach zero).

It can make sense to trade off some amount of control for productivity, but the tradeoff is inherent as soon as a project moves beyond a single developer hand writing all of the code.

[hansmayer]

I agree - the whole BS of "Hottest new programming language is English" is complete nonsense. There is something about writing the code directly from your mind that skips over the "language circuits" and makes it much more precise. Perhaps as humans with education we obtain an ability to think in programming language itself I suppose? It's probably similar to what happens in the mind of a composer or painter. This is why the natural language will never be the interface the big "AI" companies are making it to be.

[simonw]

It's impossible, and yet I experience it on a daily basis.

YMMV. I've had a lot of practice at prompting.

[lunar_mycroft]

What you've experienced is different from what was originally mentioned though. Even with the best human developers, you can't provide a normal natural language prompt and get back the exact code you would have written, because natural language has ambiguities and the probability that the other person (or LLM) will resolve all of them exactly as you would is approaches zero.

Collaborating with someone/something else via natural language in a programming project inherently trades control for productivity (or the promise of it). That tradeoff can be worth it depending on how much productivity you gain and how competent the collaborator is, but it can't be avoided.

[hansmayer]

> YMMV. I've had a lot of practice at prompting.

Ah, the old "you suck at prompting" angle again, isn't it? If you're going to shill this hard, at least come up with something new and original, this is sounding more than desperate.