Dude, that sort of transmission is only applicable to the four vedas (and even they exist in rescensions, some have later insertions eg: Maitrayani samhita, and the meter is generally lost due to language shifts). When you say "Vedic" those are the texts which count. Rāmāyana and Mahabhārata are not really "vedic" nor subject to such accurate transmission rules.
So they exist in many rescensions across India each with their own edits and interpolations. Some attempt has been made to create "critical" editions by taking the intersection of existing manuscripts but since there's no expectation of fidelity in transmission, we will never know what the original stories were.
So you can get even the western indologists to agree the battle of 10 kings mentioned in Rigveda very likely happened, and a Vasishtha and a Vishwamitra and a Trasadasyu existed in real life. However the epics leave out or conflict in many details with the aforementioned Vedic texts. Eg: a shantanu finds mention in Rigveda, a Parikshit and Janamejaya are mentioned in later samhitas. However there's no mention of pāndavas, kāuravas or a grand scale war. Neither there is a mention of a vyāsa / krishna dvaipayana in vasishtha's lineage in the accurately transmitted texts. It's very difficult to take Mahābhārata as an accurate historical document.
1. Is this actually based on any textual analysis or just AI generated? The popular understanding of the epic material is rather poor and the AI is stupid on it.
Eg: Indra would have a much larger role in original versions of mahābhārata and rāmāyana compared to Hindu popular conscience. In Ramayana he defeated kabandha, lent weapons to Rāma, and the hero is frequently compared to him as "Indra among men" - making him technically the most mentioned God in Valmiki's text (https://manasataramgini.wordpress.com/2017/02/12/the-ramaya%...).
In Mahabharata he fights equally with the krishna-arjuna in the burning of khandava episode until a truce is reached (and for reasons beyond the present redactions of the epic and owing to his prominence as ārya national god, the new capital of pāndavas is named.... Indraprastha!).
This kind of stuff is virtually unknown to AI, which reinforces the present pop understanding of the epics, which is to say super shallow and not very interesting.
You might want to try this, one step ahead of Ctrl+K
Define the interface and functions and let the AI fill in the blanks.
Eg: I want XYZ class with methodFoo and methodBar which connects to APIabcd and fetch details. Define classes for response types based on API documentation at ...., use localLibraryXYZ for ABCD.
This is the way I found to work well for me. I maintain a tight grip over the architecture, even the low level architecture, and LLM writes code I can't be bothered to write.
I find tab completions very irritating. They're "almost" correct but miss some detail. I'd rather review all of that at once rather than when writing code.
reply