Breaking away from hard-coding #3856
anonhostpi
started this conversation in
Ideas
Replies: 3 comments 1 reply
-
Related PRs/Issues/Discussions Thread. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
1 reply
-
I like some part with super fast finetuning in mutlible layers or deepRL or a mix of hard coding and some more "lerning" "soft" parts |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
0 replies
-
May be ask Auto-GPT to read its own codebase and output a review of each file. Rank the files from worst to best based on the review comments per file. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
0 replies
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
-
So a lot of work has been done lately to try to make the codebase more loosely coupled, but it has been done in a variety of inconsistent ways. I would like to foster a conversation of promoting good Inversion of Control (IoC) and encouraging contributors to stem away from "hard-coding," and possibly fix/address the issues with the current state of AutoGPT IoC
There are so many automation tools that this repo could make use of. It doesn't make sense to practice "hard-coding."
I know a lot of the re-arch is focused on making the repository more loosely-coupled, but I feel like there to needs to be a larger effort to ensure future contributors don't write code that is tightly-coupled or hard-coded.
No repository is ever going to achieve perfect IoC, but I think this repository could benefit from a higher standard for IoC. I have been reviewing a lot of the Issues and Pull Requests, and I have noticed a lot of poor IoC practices. I have also seen a lot of poor IoC practices continuously being corrected with more and more pull requests. I think elevating the IoC standard could mitigate these types of corrections.
What I had in mind for this conversation was to foster a conversation for updating the contributing guides and the manifesto to reflect the need to improve the repository's IoC.
Given the size, traction, problems, and development speed of this repo, I think we should make IoC a priority. The re-arch seems to be the first step in the right direction, but I think the second step would be to put in a standard to DISCOURAGE poor IoC practices when contributing, and emphasize to contributors why that is needed.
EDIT:
Another problem that is caused by "hard-coding" is poor localization. The repo inevitably wants to support multiple languages, but as it stands, most of the prompting and language-based features are hard-coded. I have seen a lot of efforts to support various asian and latin-based languages, however a common theme I see in the PRs is to "hard-code" the localization.
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions