I tried to take this article seriously, but it seems more like HN ragebait than an actual attempt …

> This doesn’t even make sense. LLMs hallucinate things beyond simple programming language constructs. I commonly deal with allusions to functions or library methods that would be great if they existed, but the LLM made it up on the spot. I think the author's point is your language (and more generally the tooling around it) should make this obvious, and almost all the AI agents these days will minimally run linting tools and clean up lints (which would include methods and library imports that don't exist) if they don't actively attempt to compile and test the code they've written. So you as the end user should (almost) never be seeing these made up functions.

agree - it is written like clickbait or worse like a sponsored piece. > But “hallucination” is the first thing developers bring up when someone suggests using LLMs, despite it being (more or less) a solved problem. really ? what is the author smoking to consider it a solved problem ? This statement alone invalidates the entire article in its casual irreverence for the truth. I use copilot everyday, and I know where it shines. Please dont try to sell it to me with false advertising.