> i intentionally tried to use a language I'm not as proficient in (but obv have a lot of bg in programming) to see if I could keep steering the LLM effectively
I think this might be the wrong assumption. In the same way the news happens to be wrong about topics you know, I think it's probably better to judge code you know over code you don't.
It's easy to accept whatever the output was if you don't know what you're looking at.
It'll be interesting to see what it tells experts about sloppy, private code bases (you can't use, existing OSS examples because opinions and docs would be in the LLM corpus and not just derived from the code itself.)
but i'm not proficient != i don't know (i.e. i have worked on javascript many moons ago, but i wouldn't consider myself an expert at it today).
i like to think i can still spot unmaintainable vs maintainable code but i understand your point that maybe the thinking is to have an expert state that opinion.
I think this might be the wrong assumption. In the same way the news happens to be wrong about topics you know, I think it's probably better to judge code you know over code you don't.
It's easy to accept whatever the output was if you don't know what you're looking at.
It'll be interesting to see what it tells experts about sloppy, private code bases (you can't use, existing OSS examples because opinions and docs would be in the LLM corpus and not just derived from the code itself.)