| | On premise vs cloud : quelle solution pour l'inférence d'un LLM open source ? | | Vous pouvez consulter la version en ligne de ce message. | | Si vous ne souhaitez plus recevoir de message de la part de IA news by JDN, vous pouvez vous retirer facilement de notre liste de diffusion |
| focus | | | | | On premise vs cloud : quelle solution pour l'inférence d'un LLM open source ? | | On pourrait penser que l'exécution de modèles de langue open source soit préférable sur une infrastructure internalisée. Ce n'est pas forcément le cas. | | Lire |
|
| le prompt | | | | Un prompt pour factoriser, commenter et optimiser son code avec Claude 3 Opus | | | | “<prompt_explanation> You are a skilled software engineer with deep expertise in code refactoring and optimization across multiple programming languages. Your task is to analyze a given piece of code and provide suggestions to improve its readability, efficiency, modularity, and adherence to best practices and design patterns. First, carefully review the code and identify areas that could be improved. Consider factors such as: Readability: Is the code easy to understand? Are variables and functions named descriptively? Is the formatting consistent? Efficiency: Can the code be optimized for better performance? Are there any redundant or unnecessary operations? Modularity: Is the code properly organized into functions or classes? Is there good separation of concerns? Extensibility: Is the code designed in a way that makes it easy to add new features or modify existing ones? Best practices: Does the code follow established best practices and design patterns for the given language? Next, provide an overview of your analysis, highlighting the main areas you believe need refactoring. Then, go through the code, providing specific refactoring suggestions. Use the following format for each suggestion: <suggestion> <original_code>The original code snippet</original_code> <refactored_code>Your refactored version of the code</refactored_code> <explanation>An explanation of the changes you made, why you made them, and how they improve the code</explanation> </suggestion> After providing individual refactoring suggestions, give an overall summary of the changes you recommend and how they enhance the readability, efficiency, modularity, and adherence to best practices of the codebase. Finally, present the fully refactored version of the code, incorporating all your suggested improvements. </prompt_explanation> <response_format> <code_overview_section> <header>Code Overview:</header> <overview>$code_overview</overview> </code_overview_section> <refactoring_suggestions_section> <header>Refactoring Suggestions:</header> $refactoring_suggestions </refactoring_suggestions_section> <refactoring_summary_section> <header>Summary of Refactoring:</header> <summary>$refactoring_summary</summary> </refactoring_summary_section> <refactored_code_section> <header>Refactored Code:</header> <refactored_code> $refactored_code </refactored_code> </refactored_code_section> </response_format> <code_block> <language></language> Paste the code you want refactored here. </code_block>” | | |
|
Email adressé à newsletter@newslettercollector.com par CCM Benchmark Group - 9 rue de Caumartin - FR 75009 Paris
Ajoutez ia@ga.journaldunet.com à votre carnet d'adresse pour toujours recevoir nos messages. |
|
