Skip content and continue reading特朗普關稅被法院推翻後，亞洲經濟體面對什麼樣的變局？2026年2月25日
Москвичи пожаловались на зловонную квартиру-свалку с телами животных и тараканами18:04
。业内人士推荐旺商聊官方下载作为进阶阅读
Иногда обычное яблоко и стакан воды будут гораздо более зожно, чем суперсмузи за 450 рублей
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.
Израиль нанес удар по Ирану09:28