points by frumiousirc 4 days ago | 0 comments
> One Google search (yeah I'm old, sorry, nobody "Googles" anymore)
Maybe that's your answer. Search is so bad and LLM so good that it's faster and easier to re-implement than reuse.
The only thing that slows down the new paradigm is the apparent requirement of posting the output to HN so others will find it.
That irony is not lost on me.
[–] anhyz 3 days ago
[–] gtirloni 3 days ago
LLMs will miss a lot of edge cases. This is critical for a library that parses PDFs. Ask it to review the code for issues and by the 20th time you ask, it still will find issues. How's that faster (or safer)?
I use AI heavily but it's not this omnipresent deity that knows everything at all times.
[–] croes 4 days ago
Fast, easy, safe. Choose two
[–] jeltz 3 days ago
Vibecoding your own PDF engine is choosing none of them.
This is a scary level of AI mania.
Even if you're being assisted by the best frontier model, there is no way that reimplementing a PDF engine from scratch is faster than just using the one that's already there. AI-driven coding still takes time and tokens. A web search takes maybe 60 seconds to search and find the existing implementations?
You could even tell the LLM to configure (or even fork) one of the existing implementations for you, and that would still be way faster than a from-scratch implementation.