nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Get CHATGPT to read Quicken Source code and flush out the bugs!

BigSpender69

I am wondering if the Quicken developers have thought of this but..

To talk to OPENAI and see if they would allow Quicken to give CHATGPT the entire source code of Quicken and tell it to flush out as many bugs as it can find and also to propose the solution to each bug it found.

And then, the developers would investigate each instance that CHATGPT reported manually and see if the bug is valid and if the proposed solution is valid

just a thought :)

Find more posts tagged with

New

Status: New

Comments

NotACPA

You think that Q is going to release their source code to a third party, so that the code would live forever in ChatGPT's database?

NOT A CHANCE IN H…

BigSpender69

I was thinking maybe they could come to an agreement where the code would be deleted afterwards from ChatGPT's database. A one time deal

You are right, I don't see it happening but I wonder what ChatGPT would be able to flush out of the code and suggest optimizations.

Chris_QPW

If one wants to use AI and they don't want to expose their source code one might be able to get away with a local AI, but this whole thread is based on a wrong assumption.

If this was for looking for security problems this might be a good approach, but for bugs it misses the fact that Quicken has no need for "finding bugs to work on".

When I was in the beta for Quicken years ago the list of bugs were in the thousands. I have no idea how much there are now, but one thing I'm sure of is that Quicken Inc isn't hurting for the reporting of bugs to work on. What's more this kind of searching can cause all kinds of "busy work" that really doesn't end up with much results. As in, finding a bug that no user has encountered is a waste of time in comparison to the ones that are affecting users right now.

NotACPA

The source code for Q is, undoubtedly, the most valuable asset that the company owns.

WOULD ANYONE, in their right mind, hand over their most valuable asset to a third-party???

Besides @Chris_QPW's well founded rebuttal, this idea simply make no sense from a business perspective either.