<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>CATCODER: Repository-Level Code Generation with Relevant Code and Type Context · HackerPapers discussions</title><link>https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/2406.03283/</link><description>Collected HN comments and submissions linking this paper.</description><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Mon, 02 Nov 2026 11:16:22 GMT</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/2406.03283/feed.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><item><title>CATCODER: Repository-Level Code Generation with Relevant Code and Type Context — mentioned by herrington_d</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44781397</link><guid isPermaLink="false">urn:hackerpapers:mention:2406.03283:44781397</guid><pubDate>Mon, 04 Aug 2025 01:46:23 GMT</pubDate><description>&lt;p&gt;There are researches backing some sort of &amp;quot;typed language is better for LLM&amp;quot;. Like https://arxiv.org/abs/2504.09246, Type-Constrained Code Generation with Language Models, where LLM&amp;#x27;s output is constrainted by type checkers. Also https://arxiv.org/abs/2406.03283, Enhancing Repository-Level Code Generation with Integrated Contextual Information, uses staic analyzers to produce prompts with more context info. Yet, the argument does directly translate to the conclusion that typed language is rigorously better for LLM without external tools. However, typed language and its static analysis…&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/2406.03283/"&gt;Paper and discussion history&lt;/a&gt;. A mention is not an endorsement.&lt;/p&gt;</description><category>cs.SE</category></item></channel></rss>
