cm0002@lemmy.world to Programmer Humor@programming.dev · 3 days agoJunior Prompt Engineeringlemmy.mlimagemessage-square53fedilinkarrow-up1745arrow-down18cross-posted to: programmerhumor@lemmy.ml
arrow-up1737arrow-down1imageJunior Prompt Engineeringlemmy.mlcm0002@lemmy.world to Programmer Humor@programming.dev · 3 days agomessage-square53fedilinkcross-posted to: programmerhumor@lemmy.ml
minus-squareOrvorn@slrpnk.netlinkfedilinkarrow-up81·3 days agoSomeone should invent some kind of database of syntax, like a… code
minus-squareheavydust@sh.itjust.workslinkfedilinkarrow-up38·3 days agoBut it would need to be reliable with a syntax, like some kind of grammar.
minus-squarepeoplebeproblems@midwest.sociallinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up25·3 days agoThat’s great, but then how do we know that the grammar matches what we want to do - with some sort of test?
minus-squareNatanael@infosec.publinkfedilinkarrow-up21·3 days agoHow to we know what to test? Maybe with some kind of specification?
minus-squaremaiskanzler@feddit.nllinkfedilinkarrow-up1·edit-23 days agoPeople could give things a name and write down what type of thing it is.
minus-squareKnock_Knock_Lemmy_In@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up9·3 days agoWe don’t want anything amateur. It has to be a professional codegrammar.
Someone should invent some kind of database of syntax, like a… code
But it would need to be reliable with a syntax, like some kind of grammar.
That’s great, but then how do we know that the grammar matches what we want to do - with some sort of test?
How to we know what to test? Maybe with some kind of specification?
People could give things a name and write down what type of thing it is.
A codegrammar?
We don’t want anything amateur. It has to be a professional codegrammar.