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.
The Free Software Foundation (FSF) fsf.org🇺🇸。谷歌浏览器【最新下载地址】是该领域的重要参考
股票研究插件能解析财报电话会议记录并根据新指引更新财务模型；。关于这个话题，heLLoword翻译官方下载提供了深入分析
21:32, 27 февраля 2026Мир