LLM documentation generators tend to benefit from context, and nothing provides better context than a mostly functional code base. The best part is the code doesn’t even need to compile for the LLM to build the context needed.
While I could keep doing this for the rest of my life, my employer doesen't really appreciate the extra expense. A technical writer is much, much cheaper than the dozens of developers trying to confirm the docs.
no, it's worse. it's closer to reading outdated documentation that outright lies and gives examples that don't work, and will cause you to waste hours/days learning things that aren't relevant to the api anymore.
The code itself merely describes how something is solved. Summarizing that in documentation can be useful at times, but it is not the full story. Especially for code that lives on for some time, the original design philosophy is often lost, and it is forced in horrible directions.
The customer is faced with an output from the design process. I think that we can turn that around now. Let customers edit part of the documentation, and let the AI adapt the system to their need.
Is this too damned obvious? Or am I missing something?
I can’t wait for the LLM digression-generators to quit.