Interesting discussion with ChtGPT

[Otto]

Hello friends,
today, I had an interesting discussion with ChtGPT.

This was the starting point:
User (I):
The weaknesses you mention are fixed with FiveWin. Could it be that in principle simpler - in terms of syntax - languages will experience a revival in the future, because AI with its fast answers makes many libraries and frameworks obsolete. And if a new generation of programmers emerges, I think the simpler will be preferred.

ChatGPT:
That's an interesting consideration. Here are some thoughts on that:


Best regards,
Otto
**********************************

Certainly, here's the translation:

Can you make this calculation in harbour/clipper for me?

ChatGPT:
Yes, of course! Harbour/Clipper has a slightly different syntax than modern programming languages like JavaScript, but the basic concepts remain the same.

Here's how you can implement the calculation in Harbour/Clipper:

clipper
Copy code
PROCEDURE Main()

LOCAL nHours := 9
LOCAL nMinutes := 30
LOCAL nUntilHours := 11
LOCAL nUntilMinutes := 15

// Convert times to minutes
LOCAL nStartMinutes := nHours * 60 + nMinutes
LOCAL nEndMinutes := nUntilHours * 60 + nUntilMinutes

// Calculate duration in minutes
LOCAL nDurationInMinutes := nEndMinutes - nStartMinutes

// Determine the number of 15-minute intervals
LOCAL nQuarterHourUnits := INT(nDurationInMinutes / 15)

? "Duration: " + STR(nQuarterHourUnits) + " quarter-hour units"

RETURN
Note that the Harbour/Clipper syntax is a bit outdated and differs from modern programming languages, but the mathematical operations are the same. You can run this code in your Harbour/Clipper environment to get the number of 15-minute units between the two given times.

User:
Regarding only this part, what is considered outdated for example?

ChatGPT:
Sorry, I wasn't clear. When I talk about "outdated", I'm referring to the general context of programming languages and not specifically to the provided code snippet.

In the context of software development, Harbour/Clipper is seen as an older programming language or environment, especially compared to newer languages and technologies. However, the provided code snippet shows basic mathematical operations and logic that are similar in most programming languages.

Some differences or "outdated" features of Clipper compared to modern languages might be:

Declaration method: In modern languages, it's common to specify the data type when declaring (e.g., int, float, string), while in Clipper, using LOCAL or other keywords without a specific data type is common.

Syntax: For example, Clipper uses ? for print statements, which is uncommon in modern languages.

Standard libraries: Modern languages often offer more extensive standard libraries and functions.

Integration into modern environments: While Clipper was designed for specific use cases, modern languages often offer more flexibility and integration into current technologies and platforms.

However, this doesn't mean the code or language is "bad" or "wrong". It's just a reflection of how technologies and best practices have evolved over time. Clipper and Harbour still have their use cases and are quite suitable for certain tasks.

User:
The weaknesses you mention are fixed with FiveWin. Could it be that in principle simpler - in terms of syntax - languages will experience a revival in the future, because AI with its fast answers makes many libraries and frameworks obsolete. And if a new generation of programmers emerges, I think the simpler will be preferred.

ChatGPT:
That's an interesting consideration. Here are some thoughts on that:

Simplicity: Simplicity can indeed be a driving factor, especially for newcomers to programming. A clear, easily understandable syntax can help people get started and reduce the learning curve.

AI Integration: With the advent of AI and automated code creation, some of the more complex aspects of programming might indeed be simplified or even automated. This could reduce the need for extensive libraries and frameworks, as the AI might be able to generate the required code based on higher-level instructions or intentions.

FiveWin and Harbour: Tools like FiveWin, which enhance and modernize Harbour's capabilities, are crucial for maintaining the relevance and applicability of languages like it in today's tech landscape.

Cyclical Trends: In software development, there are often cyclical trends. For instance, there was a move away from monolithic applications towards microservice-based architectures, and now there are discussions about "monoliths done right". So, it wouldn't be surprising if simpler programming languages or approaches experience a renaissance in the future.

Education and Learning: As AI tools become more accessible and simplify code creation, it could also change how programming is taught and learned. Instead of focusing on complex syntax or frameworks, curriculums might place more emphasis on concepts, logic, and problem-solving.

Tools and Environments: Regardless of the language, the tools and development environments that support a language will continue to be crucial. A simple language with a powerful, user-friendly IDE could be very appealing.

In conclusion, it's entirely possible that simpler languages or approaches might see a renaissance in the future, especially as AI technologies become more integrated and transform the development process. However, it will also be important to strike a balance between simplicity and capability, ensuring developers still have the control and flexibility they need.

[TimStone]

The problem with so much of those responses is they contain very generic statements. Clearly the input into the data used for those responses reflects a bias to "what is known" by the person who did the input.

It reminds me of the responses Windows people had to DOS systems. They had no clue about DOS, or how it operated, or the benefits many found with it's capabilities, so they always just said it was obsolete and not usable.

Where tech people are ignorant, they simply make negative assertions about whatever it is they do not know or understand, instead of expanding their own knowledge base.

[Otto]

Tim, if I understand correctly, your comment about AI is of a general nature and does not refer to the post above.
Regards,
Otto

[TimStone]

Actually, I was referring to that post. It calls the current Harbour language "outdated" but it does so linking back, actually, to the Clipper days.

Look at the generalizations. It keeps comparing to Clipper, but the arguments, to me, fail:
Declarations: Having to specify Data Type is certainly not new. It pre-dates Clipper ( an old, DOS, compiler ) in many languages. Harbour frees us from that restriction
Syntax: Swift ( Apple ) uses ? print statements. Harbour, and FWH, are far more sophisticated
Libraries: What functionality is NOT covered in Harbour/FWH
Integration: Again with the Clipper stuff, and it doesn't even know what it was used for. We constantly see new integrations to the most current versions of Windows, and databases, in Harbour/FWH

Here is the problem I am referencing. Essentially, the response assumes Harbour/FWH is inferior because it compares current programming "languages" with Clipper, a DOS compiler. Because it doesn't have the accurate information in its data, it gives an erroneous conclusion. Let's assume you are a new programmer, and are looking for a programming option to build an application for a client. A friend tells you about Harbour/FWH, so you ask this AI system about it, and you get this response. Are you going ahead with obtaining and using these tools ? Based on this response, I doubt it, and that might be a real concern.

Here is a challenge for you. Take a look at Swift, the current modern Apple OS ( and versions of iOS ) programming tool. You can get books to read about how to use it, and its programming language. Try to find resources that tell you all the available functions for it. Do you have a wide variety of functions to simplify your work like we have with FWH ? How many add on libraries must you buy from 3rd party developers just to do a functional application ? When it comes down to the elements of the programming language, are they really different than C++ which is used for Harbour ? How about the structure, like loops, if/then and case statements. Are they somehow more modern ?

So, my statement was essentially, this response takes a lack of information, and from that draws erroneous conclusions, and tries to defend them with responses that do not actually relate to your question.

AI is interesting, but it is sadly incomplete. Even so, people today tend to believe whatever they hear without actually checking it out closely, and therein lies my concern.

Oh, and I do have ChatGPT.

[Otto]

Tim, sure, but it's like with all things. you have to question things.
And I think what turns out well is that Harbour/fivewin can have a good future through simplicity,
which was actually no longer seen.
That's why I posted that part.
Best regards,
Otto

[TimStone]

I am glad you posted it. I just see too many programmers today who only play in their comfort zone. AI may post some code but will it be the best way to handle a task or just the easiest?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Otto]

Tim,

I am trying to determine a work style for how I can productively use AI for my work.

The prompt editor I made helps well.
Here I save the questions that I have already worked out and that I may need again.
I then ask at the end:
Could you help me create a FAQ by reviewing and potentially revising the questions I provide?"

Depending on the question, I take the point into the PROMPT_Editor question catalog or into my manual.

My tool - preproPatcher - AKA Harbourino - is very suitable for collaboration with AI. I have organized my code according to logical units and can then simply send these blocks to the AI and have it edited.

I am particularly surprised by the rapid progress in the responses and the good results. Even harbour/FIVEWIN questions are now being answered well.
A few months ago, there were practically no hits.

Best regards,
Otto

[Enrico Maria Giordano]

ChatGPT:
Yes, of course! Harbour/Clipper has a slightly different syntax than modern programming languages like JavaScript, but the basic concepts remain the same.

JavaScript, from Wikipedia:

First appeared December 4, 1995; 27 years ago[

Modern?

[Otto]

Enrico, t's such a pity that everything related to the topic of AI always ends in a black and white discussion.

Whether we like it or not, AI is a fact. I think we now need creative approaches on how we can make the best of it.

I just saw in the ChatGPT update that soon one will be able to "Create a GPT Beta Customize a version of ChatGPT for a specific purpose."

We should collaborate on this.
Best regards,
Otto

[Enrico Maria Giordano]

I already express my opinion regarding current AI status in another thread. I could change my mind in the future if AI will evolve.

[paquitohm]

No he conseguido casi nunca que ChatGPT me de una respuesta correcta, incluso en faciles calculos matematicos, como son pasar de una base a otra.

He terminado harto de la incompetencia de ChatGPT que sólo está causando errores a todos aquellos que creen en él a pie juntillas

[Otto]

Hello Paquito,

The way you ask ChatGPT makes a big difference in how effective its answers will be. When you're dealing with specific things like converting numbers between bases in math, it's crucial to clearly state the bases you're starting with and switching to.

Think of prompt engineering as the art of crafting your question so it's crystal clear to the AI what you're looking for. Doing this gets you sharper, more on-point answers, and makes chatting with AI models a whole lot smoother.

Best regards,
Otto

[Enrico Maria Giordano]

Ok, I will try it as per your advice, thank you.

[Antonio Linares]

chatGPT version 4 Turbo, publicada ayer, es una versión mucho más potente y precisa que versiones anteriores y puedes usarse gratuitamente desde:

https://platform.openai.com/playground

Hay que seleccionar la versión gpt-4-1106-preview en el menú de la izquierda

[Otto]

Thank you, Antonio.
It is very difficult to keep up with the current developments in a timely manner.
Perhaps we can post our experiences here, which we believe might interest the group members.
Best regards,
Otto