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.
立足当前和长远，防止返贫致贫和乡村全面振兴，一体谋划、一体推进。。业内人士推荐heLLoword翻译官方下载作为进阶阅读
。业内人士推荐旺商聊官方下载作为进阶阅读
a once great company, provided Diebold with their once great operating system.。业内人士推荐搜狗输入法2026作为进阶阅读
Samsung Galaxy S26 vs. S24: After comparing both models, here's my take
backpressure: 'strict' // or 'block', 'drop-oldest', 'drop-newest'