LLM's think we should have language tuples!

[Manu]

On Fri, 28 Mar 2025 at 06:35, FeepingCreature via Digitalmars-d <
digitalmars-d at puremagic.com> wrote:

> On Tuesday, 25 March 2025 at 04:44:15 UTC, Manu wrote:
> > I asked Grok to write me a portable 64x64->128 multiplication
> > function in D to get the pattern, and this is what it wrote:
> >
> > What I loved is that its function returned a pair of ulong's,
> > because apparently it made an assumption that we had
> > in-language tuples! I wonder where it got that idea?
> >
> > We should learn from our AI overlords! :P
>
> Note: to get good results from AIs, ask them to write tests as
> well, then run the tests and post the answers and ask them to
> debug the issue. :) You have to handhold a bit.
>

I kinda feel like every commenter in this thread rather missed the point ;)
I know how to multiply big numbers; I was just throwing random stuff at it
trying to test its limits. The operation is not what I was interested in
here; I just liked that it assumed we had tuples! It's right to do so as
far as I'm concerned, and it's embarrassing that we don't.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.puremagic.com/pipermail/digitalmars-d/attachments/20250330/73d1c156/attachment.htm>