Hacker News Reader

Comment by OutOfHere | Hacker News Reader

This is why you should always rush your engineers, never giving them enough time to validate or understand what ChatGPT just spewed. Good job. /s

Meanwhile, I go through the tedious process of understanding ChatGPT's code letter-by-letter, also reading the docs, searching StackOverflow, even offering and rewarding bounties on StackOverflow, all to see if the code makes a shred of sense.

View on HN

When I was coding https://stackoverflow.com/a/77210784/308851 well, I had no idea how to open an SSH connection using go, I barely knew basic Go so I asked ChatGPT. The meat of the SSH connecting code is still pretty much ChatGPT written (bad chx!) but it contained a couple defers like defer session.Close() which I needed to understand and remove before it became usable as a utility function. I did search for ssh.PublicKeysCallback(agent.NewClient(sshAgent).Signers) to see whether others use it and I found they do and their code was very similar so I decided to trust ChatGPT code even if I only understood it enough to understand but not enough to write similar code. It's just an SSH connection, the risk is quite low, the expected result of bogus code is just not working, I wouldn't expect subtle errors here. The rest of the logic is hand written, though.

> It's just an SSH connection, the risk is quite low

Yeah just a secure shell what ever could go wrong with code you don't understand? Probably nothing much right?

well, it's client. What could go wrong? I mean, it might not connect, right? I did understand it to some degree.

I would make sure the SSH client doesn't connect to a man-in-the-middle!

Well, that's fairly self evident. It's not like we are auditing thousands of lines of code: ssh.Dial("tcp", serverName, config)

the tricky part , really , is the syntax for ssh config but again that's easy to understand even if it's very hard to write.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com