Published
Jun 29, 2024
Updated
Jun 29, 2024

The Surprising Truth About LLMs and Coding Style

Beyond Functional Correctness: Investigating Coding Style Inconsistencies in Large Language Models
By
Yanlin Wang|Tianyue Jiang|Mingwei Liu|Jiachi Chen|Zibin Zheng

Summary

Large language models (LLMs) have revolutionized code generation, but there is a hidden problem: they often don't write code like humans do. This may seem minor, but coding style profoundly impacts how readable, maintainable, and ultimately usable code is. A new study dives deep into this issue, revealing the surprising inconsistencies between LLM-generated code and code written by human developers. Researchers meticulously compared code produced by leading LLMs like CodeLlama, StarCoder, and DeepSeekCoder against human-written code from real-world projects. The results? LLMs have distinct stylistic quirks, particularly regarding how they format code, name variables, and utilize existing code libraries (APIs). They sometimes use outdated APIs, or completely miss opportunities to leverage Python's built-in functions. While the research reveals that LLM-generated code generally performs comparably to human-written code in terms of pure functionality, the stylistic differences raise important questions. Can these differences be smoothed over? The researchers investigated this too. They found that by adding specific style guidelines directly into the prompts given to the LLMs, it’s sometimes possible to nudge them toward a more human-like coding style. There's a catch, though: emphasizing one area, like readability, might mean losing ground in another, such as conciseness. This research points to a crucial challenge: while LLMs are getting better, they still don't truly grasp the nuances of how humans write code. Future improvements will likely involve a deeper understanding of human programming habits, perhaps through more refined training data or more sophisticated prompt engineering techniques. In the meantime, the next time you see LLM-generated code, take a closer look. Its functionality might be perfect, but its style could be another story.
🍰 Interesting in building your own agents?
PromptLayer provides the tools to manage and monitor prompts with your whole team. Get started for free.

Question & Answers

What specific methods did researchers use to compare LLM-generated code with human-written code?
The researchers conducted a comparative analysis focusing on three key aspects: code formatting, variable naming conventions, and API usage patterns. They evaluated code from leading LLMs (CodeLlama, StarCoder, and DeepSeekCoder) against real-world human projects. The methodology involved examining stylistic elements like indentation, spacing, and naming patterns, as well as analyzing how effectively both human and LLM-generated code utilized built-in functions and libraries. For example, they found LLMs sometimes missed opportunities to use Python's built-in functions or relied on outdated APIs, showing a gap in their understanding of modern programming practices.
How can AI-generated code improve software development productivity?
AI-generated code can significantly boost software development productivity by automating routine coding tasks and providing quick solutions to common programming challenges. The main benefits include faster code generation, reduced time spent on basic implementation, and the ability to quickly prototype ideas. For example, developers can use AI to generate boilerplate code, suggest code completions, or create basic function implementations. However, it's important to note that human oversight is still necessary to ensure proper coding style, maintainability, and optimal use of modern programming practices. This technology works best as a collaborative tool rather than a complete replacement for human programmers.
What are the key differences between human-written and AI-generated code that developers should be aware of?
The main differences between human-written and AI-generated code lie in coding style, API usage, and overall code organization. AI-generated code tends to be functionally correct but may lack the intuitive structure and readability that experienced developers naturally implement. Key distinctions include variable naming conventions, how code is formatted, and the selection of APIs or built-in functions. While AI code might work perfectly, it may require additional refinement to match human coding standards and best practices. This is particularly important for team projects where code maintainability and consistency are crucial for long-term success.

PromptLayer Features

  1. Prompt Management
  2. The paper highlights how specific style guidelines in prompts can influence LLM coding style, suggesting the need for systematic prompt versioning and refinement
Implementation Details
Create versioned prompt templates with explicit coding style guidelines, track performance across versions, maintain a library of style-specific prompts
Key Benefits
• Consistent code style across generated outputs • Traceable evolution of prompt engineering efforts • Reusable templates for different coding standards
Potential Improvements
• Add automated style checking integration • Implement style-specific scoring metrics • Create organization-specific style template libraries
Business Value
Efficiency Gains
Reduced time spent manually reformatting generated code
Cost Savings
Lower code maintenance costs through consistent styling
Quality Improvement
More maintainable and readable code output
  1. Testing & Evaluation
  2. The research compares LLM outputs against human-written code, highlighting the need for systematic evaluation of code style and functionality
Implementation Details
Set up automated testing pipelines that evaluate both code functionality and style metrics, implement A/B testing for different prompt variations
Key Benefits
• Objective measurement of code quality • Automated style compliance checking • Systematic comparison of different prompt versions
Potential Improvements
• Integrate with popular code linting tools • Add custom style metrics tracking • Implement automated regression testing
Business Value
Efficiency Gains
Faster validation of generated code quality
Cost Savings
Reduced QA effort through automated testing
Quality Improvement
More consistent and reliable code outputs

The first platform built for prompt engineering