Using ChatGPT to implement tic-tac-toe in bash

I have to admit that I'm a bit late to the party. OpenAI's ChatGPT is currently freely accessibly in a public beta, so I wanted to use the opportunity to evaluate whether I need to start looking for a new job anytime soon. After some more prosaic prompts to the system, I decided to try having it implement a little program. I thought that tic-tac-toe would be a nice experiment.

So I prompted it to write a bash script which plays tic-tac-toe using an optimal strategy.

In the first response, I already got quite a lot of building blocks:

I assume the API ran in some sort of timeout, as the last function wasn't implemented fully. Therefore I prompted it a for the whole function to make the computer move, and it indeed delivered complete implementation. So I had a lot of functions, but no game to actually play. And naturally - or at least naturally for software developer - I asked if it can generate a game loop, and I wasn't let down.

I copy-pasted the three snippets into a file, held my breath, executed the script, and: it worked. Well, at least sort of. The generated program let the human player make the first move. As the only rational opening move is to take the center field, I didn't immediately discover a subtle bug, until I tried to play a non-optimal game.

The generated code represents the board as an array of nine strings, where an empty field is represented as a single space character. The array was only initialized with 8 strings. To be fair, there are only two hard problems in software engineering: cache invalidation, naming things and off-by-one errors. And who am I, to be too harsh in a code review? I conversationally (it's ChatGPT after all!) asked it whether it could spot and correct the off-by-one mistake in the initialization of the board. And here it started to become obvious that it is a gigantic correlation machine, which although it produces very impressive results (and confidently sounding one's), it has no actual concepts of the things it generates. There is - as expected - no intelligence and no learning in the human sense. Here is how the dialog went down.

You are correct, there is an off-by-one error in the initialization of the board. Currently, the board is initialized as follows:

board=(" " " " " " " " " " " " " " " ")

Just that the board wasn't initialized as quoted above. This was no reproduction for its initial error, but another one (which it continued to explain in prose - and incorrectly so).

This creates an array with 13 elements, with indices ranging from 0 to 12.

After that it created a description of a correct solution in prose, directly followed by yet another incorrect implementation:

However, in the tic tac toe game, the board has only 9 squares, with indices ranging from 0 to 8. To fix this off-by-one error, the board should be initialized as follows:

board=(" " " " " " " " " " " ")

This creates an array with 9 elements, with indices ranging from 0 to 8, which corresponds to the 9 squares in the tic tac toe game.

It is a fun tool to play around with and I'm not unimpressed by the results. But I don't tremble in fear of being layed off anytime soon due to its existence. For those who are not convinced, Hendrik Erz has written up a lot more good reasons not to fall for the hype.

If you are interested, you can also read the complete chat transcript and the generated source code (where the correction of the initialization was done manually).