logoalt Hacker News

pjmlp • yesterday at 8:50 PM • 4 replies • view on HN

I would rather have LLM directly generate machine code, and best of all, macro Assemblers are blazing fast for decades.


Replies

dgb23 • today at 10:06 AM

One of the best techniques for using LLM coding is to let it write programs that frontload and automate work in a repeatable and testable manner rather than letting it only do free form turns.

Letting it generate machine code directly would be the opposite of that.

➕ show 1 reply
bayindirh • yesterday at 9:03 PM

You can't PGO that code, though. Also, I'm not sure it can generate architecture specific optimized (-march, -mtune) code as well.

Considering it just pulls and remixes blocks, this is a very tall order for today's LLMs, and maybe a couple of generations as well.

Calling GCC/clang at the back and emitting ASM is both cheating and has no advantages whatsoever as well.

➕ show 1 reply
kibwen • today at 2:24 AM

This is like saying that a strong man would rather dig a hole with his bare hands than use a shovel. Structured programming languages are force multipliers, it makes absolutely zero sense to forego them just so you can vibe assembly directly.

➕ show 1 reply
politician • today at 2:22 AM

Use a working Go program as the prompt+oracle for cross-language port or direct generation.

➕ show 1 reply