this post was submitted on 22 Nov 2025
136 points (98.6% liked)
Programming
23580 readers
114 users here now
Welcome to the main community in programming.dev! Feel free to post anything relating to programming here!
Cross posting is strongly encouraged in the instance. If you feel your post or another person's post makes sense in another community cross post into it.
Hope you enjoy the instance!
Rules
Rules
- Follow the programming.dev instance rules
- Keep content related to programming in some way
- If you're posting long videos try to add in some form of tldr for those who don't want to watch videos
Wormhole
Follow the wormhole through a path of communities !webdev@programming.dev
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
The issue, presumably the PR (linked at the top of the issue because of reference).
Look at the code change. It gets inputs and loops over them and seems to do an in-place fixup. But the code indent is wrong, and it even changed the function definition of the unrelated next function. In Python, the indent-logic-significance language.
I assume they briefly showed the code on stage. Even then it should have been obvious to any developer. py file, messy indent, changes unrelated function.
Please correct me if this is the wrong PR.
Based on what they showed in the demo, that’s not the PR. gpt made more changes than what’s in that PR and also modified a different transform function. My guess is they never actually pushed the actual commit from the demo or made a PR.
I see, thank you for the clarification. I was quite confused because it seemed to be missing, this one didn’t quite seem correct. If they never even pushed it as a MR then that makes more sense. Then the whole “hasn’t been merged yet” is missing that it hasn’t even been created.
Actually the function definition is unchanged. The line that was "added" at the bottom was also "removed" at the top. This is just the Git diff generator being confused, which won't come as a surprise to anyone that has ever used it.
The indendentation really is messed-up though.
An indentation change is a definition code change. And as I pointed out, it's a py file, and Python is an indent-significant language.
Of course, but you said:
It is weird to split the two in your sentence, as only the indentation of the next function definition was changed, not the definition itself.
You can just take the L and say you didn't see that the function definition that was "added" was just "removed" at the top. It is an easy mistake to make, I know I've done it many times.
That's not what happened though.
Changing the indent of the def changes the definition. That's my whole argument.
I don't get why you say "of course", agreeing with my point, but then "it was only the indentation that was changed".
Does not appear to be the correct MR. Comments on the issue allude to "they never pushed it" so sounds like there never was an MR. Watching the announcement where they demo'd it, it wrote much more than is in that MR. Not to defend OpenAI, I hate vibe coded solutions that add so many useless comments.
Write. Readable. Code.
I see, thank you for the clarification. I was quite confused because it seemed to be missing, this one didn't quite seem correct. If they never even pushed it as a MR then that makes more sense. Then the whole "hasn't been merged yet" is missing that it hasn't even been created.
What's with the comments? "Hi mom"
So "LuminaX-alt" is an AI?