Re: LLM Experiments, Part 1: Corrections

[Andrew Hyatt <ahyatt@gmail.com>]

On Tue, Jan 23, 2024 at 08:17 PM "T.V Raman" <raman@google.com> wrote:

> All very good points, Kartik!
>
> Some related thoughts below:
>
> 1. I think we should for now treat  prose-rewriting vs code-rewriting as
>    separate flows -- but that said, limit our types of "flows"
>    to 2. More might emerge over time, but it's too early.

How do you see the code and prose rewriting requiring different UI or processing?

> 2. Multi-step flows with LLMs are still early -- or feel early to me; I
>    think that for now, we should just have human-in-the-loop at each
>    step, but then leverage the power of Emacs to help the user stay
>    efficient in the human-in-the-loop step, start with simple things
>    like putting point and mark in the right place, populate Emacs
>    completions with the right choices etc.

It can't be at every step, though. Maybe you wouldn't consider this a
step, but in my next demo, one step is to get JSON from the LLM, which
requires parsing out the JSON (which tends to be either the entire
response, or often in a markdown block, or if none of the above, we
retry a certain amount of times). But agreed that in general that we do
want humans to be in control, especially when things get complicated.