Comment on Why don't these code-writing AIs just output straight up machine code?
Shimitar@downonthestreet.eu 15 hours ago
They would not be able to.
Ai only mix and match what they have copied from human stuff, and most of code out there is on high level language, not machine code.
In other words, ai don’t know what they are doing they just maximize a probability to give you an answer, that’s all.
But really, the objective is to provide a human with a more or less correct boilerplate code, and humans would not read machine code
This is not necessarily true. Many models have been trained on assembly code, and you can ask them to produce it. Some mad lad created some scripts a while ago to let AI “compile” to assembly and create an executable. It sometimes worked for simple “Hello, world” type stuff, which is hilarious.
But I guess it is easier for a large language model to produce working code for a higher level programming language, where concepts and functions are more defined in the body that it used to get trained.
uranibaba@lemmy.world 15 hours ago
The compiler is likely better at producing machine code as well, if LLMs could produce it.
riskable@programming.dev 15 hours ago
To add to this: It’s much more likely that AI will be used to improve compilers—not replace them.
Aside: AI is so damned slow already. Imagine AI compiler times… Yeesh!
naught101@lemmy.world 7 hours ago
Strong doubt that AI would be useful for producing improved compilers. That’s a task that would require extremely detailed understanding of logical edge cases of a given language to machine code translation. By definition, no content exists that can be useful for training in that context. AIs will certainly try to help, because they are people pleasing machines. But I can’t see them being actually useful.