Что думаешь? Оцени!
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.
。业内人士推荐谷歌浏览器【最新下载地址】作为进阶阅读
置身整座院落，可以感受到主人的雅趣情怀和志高德远，以及对家族延绵的期望。一砖一瓦，彰显主人自律务实、修身养性的儒商风尚；一雕一琢，蕴藏着建筑匠人精湛深厚的技艺传承。。搜狗输入法2026对此有专业解读
San Francisco, CA
pixel[2] = pixel[2] 0.04045f ? powf((pixel[2] + 0.055f) / 1.055f, 2.4f) : pixel[2] / 12.92f;