But also, everyone says "it's the harness" and almost nobody ever gives good examples, it gets a bit tiring to read everywhere, as if everyone wants to sell a harness to us.
But here’s the standard question: At what speeds/other limiting factors?
Co-Authored By: Haiku 4.5
If I ask something like: "I'm building a simple X as a learning exercise, I'm writing the code so please only answer the question I'm asking and don't try to solve the problem directly. How does ..." There's a 30% chance it starts reading and writing code immediately and a 20% chance it argues with a "design decision" that will bite me in the non-existent future of my learning exercise. If I ask a follow up question, naively assuming that the context from my original question still stands without repeating, it will almost assuredly start making modifications to my code.
Perhaps reverse the question: Are your build/construct requirements just really counter-productive to how LLMs need to understand things?
I've found constructing the code, writing the tests, adding the docs; then running through them gets most of the way there.
I've also found that making a simple obvious edit is a useless endevour when the LLM is primed for the long context tasks.
So, again, the question is reversed: are you over reliant on the LLM to do even stupid simple likes like editting a css variable?
Yeah, expecting the world when all you have is a 8GB graphics card? You're going to be disappointed.
16GB is table stakes (IQ3_XSS). 32 GB is better.