Oh wow that is fun. Also if the writeup isn’t misrepresenting the situation, then I feel like it’s actually a good point - if there’s an easy drop-in speed-up, why does it matter whether it’s suggest by a human or an LLM agent?
LLM didn't discover this issue, developers found it. Instead of fixing it themselves, they intentionally turned the problem into an issue, left it open for a new human contributor to pick up, and tagged it as such.
I think this is what worries me the most about coding agents- I'm not convinced they'll be able to do my job anytime soon but most of the things I use it for are the types of tasks I would have previously set aside for an intern at my old company. Hard to imagine myself getting into coding without those easy problems that teach a newbie a lot but are trivial for a mid-level engineer.
It doesn’t represent the situation accurately. There’s a whole thread where humans debate the performance optimization and come to the conclusion that it’s a wash but a good project for an amateur human to look into.
One of those operations makes a row-major array, the other makes a col-major array. Downstream functions will have different performance based on which is passed.
It matters because if the code is illegal, stolen, contains a backdoor, or whatever, you can jail a human author after the fact to disincentivize such naughty behavior.
