During development I encountered a caveat: Opus 4.5 can’t test or view a terminal output, especially one with unusual functional requirements. But despite being blind, it knew enough about the ratatui terminal framework to implement whatever UI changes I asked. There were a large number of UI bugs that likely were caused by Opus’s inability to create test cases, namely failures to account for scroll offsets resulting in incorrect click locations. As someone who spent 5 years as a black box Software QA Engineer who was unable to review the underlying code, this situation was my specialty. I put my QA skills to work by messing around with miditui, told Opus any errors with occasionally a screenshot, and it was able to fix them easily. I do not believe that these bugs are inherently due to LLM agents being better or worse than humans as humans are most definitely capable of making the same mistakes. Even though I myself am adept at finding the bugs and offering solutions, I don’t believe that I would inherently avoid causing similar bugs were I to code such an interactive app without AI assistance: QA brain is different from software engineering brain.
第七十三条 有下列行为之一的，处警告或者一千元以下罚款；情节较重的，处五日以上十日以下拘留，可以并处一千元以下罚款：
，详情可参考一键获取谷歌浏览器下载
Цены на нефть взлетели до максимума за полгода17:55。旺商聊官方下载对此有专业解读
今年前三季度销售开支到了 12.80 亿，比去年一整年花的还多……
64D COUNTR DES_CS SBRM ; CS.base = selector