IMHO, it's still far from GA quality/usability. A must-have feature that's missing is a toggle switch that lets you temporarily turn it off. Without a feature, it can get really noisy.
GitHub Copilot is generally available
31–40 of 796 posts
Re: GitHub Copilot is generally available
#32Thank you, GitHub, this is one of the best things! No, it cannot make me write code I couldn't write before. It does not autopilot and does all the coding by itself. But it still boosts my productivity greatly, making me relaxed while coding and focusing on the important part rather than errands.
I've been using it for a while now. When I forget some syntax occasionally I'll switch this on instead of searching documentation or google, but more often than not my IDE can get me unstuck with less overhead.
Also if there are some repetitive sections of code I need to bang out quickly this will auto fill that repetitive pattern (although I'd argue this is usually a sign that the code should be cleaned up)
I avoid letting it fill in large swaths of code though. I have no idea where that code is coming from (license infringement?) and it tends to go way off the rails.
Additionally I feel that it makes me a worse programmer if I allow it to take over too much.
I've been programming for 20 years (more if you count my time as a kid) and have a certain flow. Part of that flow is the natural pause between thinking of solutions and typing. When the computer is beating me to the typing portion (and often times making mistakes) I would find myself doing more code review than code writing. Sometimes a few bugs popped up and it was thanks to copilot (or was it me failing to correct copilot's mistakes?).
I found my brain sort of switching into a different mode. Rather than thinking about my next steps I was thinking about the steps the computer just took and how I needed to clean them up.
Rather than the AI being my reviewer during a paired programming session, I was the computer's reviewer.
So now, like I said I use it very sparingly.
Re: GitHub Copilot is generally available
#33Does Copilot already display the licenses of the code it might insert/suggest, or assure the developer, that the inserted/suggested code is not a verbatim copy of existing code? How can developers be sure, that they are not violating licenses by using Copilot?
My sincere question is what if a developer looks at some GPL code, and then that developer encounters a situation in a corporate project where-in he uses the GPL code from memory, is that already a violation? So to avoid a violation a developer needs to perform a mind-wipe?
It's arguable. Copyright cares a lot about provenance, transformation, and commercial consequences. It all comes down to what you can afford to litigate. Some projects go to extreme lengths, like Wine not accepting code from anyone who has seen leaked Windows sources.
Re: GitHub Copilot is generally available
#34Are there any plans for GitHub Copilot to ship an API? I think it would be interesting to set it up w/ my side project https://codeamigo.dev
Re: GitHub Copilot is generally available
#35Does Copilot already display the licenses of the code it might insert/suggest, or assure the developer, that the inserted/suggested code is not a verbatim copy of existing code? How can developers be sure, that they are not violating licenses by using Copilot?
From my experience with it the suggestions are so generic it's hard to imagine anyone has a legit license to "formatDateISO....() {code here}". Maybe I'm using it wrong but I've hardly seen it pump out a mass volume of code.
You really only need one example to offset this anecdote, so here you are: https://mobile.twitter.com/mitsuhiko/status/1410886329924194...
Copyright violations are a genuine concern from the outputted code, GitHub themselves have admitted it may emit raw training data rarely.
Re: GitHub Copilot is generally available
#36What's the criteria for being considered "a maintainer of a popular open source project"? They never actually publish the criteria anywhere from what I can tell. They just say visit the subscription page and if you are eligible it should be available to you and if you see a charge then you are not eligible. I think though they should still be transparent about what their metric is for determining popular projects on…
At a minimum, 4.3k stars is not enough, because I don't qualify.
Re: GitHub Copilot is generally available
#37Earlier quoted context omitted.
My sincere question is what if a developer looks at some GPL code, and then that developer encounters a situation in a corporate project where-in he uses the GPL code from memory, is that already a violation? So to avoid a violation a developer needs to perform a mind-wipe?
I’d be even more curious (more philosophically than anything) as to who is liable for the mishap if Copilot suggests something that ends up violating a license. Is it the developer? The developer’s company? GitHub? Maybe the “AI” is the ultimate scapegoat (“we can’t be liable for what our helpful robot decides to do”)!
The details might differ per country, but my non-lawyer intuition clearly says that you are responsible for the code you publish, no matter what tool has suggested it.
Re: GitHub Copilot is generally available
#38Earlier quoted context omitted.
> What's the criteria for being considered "a maintainer of a popular open source project"? The FAQ [0] says > A maintainer of a popular open source project is defined as someone who has write or admin access to one or more of the *most popular open source projects* on GitHub (emphasis added) [0] https://github.com/pricing#i-work-on-open-source-projects-ca...
Ummm, yes, that was my original point. What does "one or more of the most popular open source projects on GitHub" mean exactly? Do you need a certain number of github stars on your project? Are you listed on some "most popular github projects specific page"? or what?
I got this free access. Tried to figure how to request this "Verified" status, whatever it means, but github seems to set it automatically and notified me "you are eligible to use GitHub Copilot for free". I'm not sure how exactly they do it and what defines "the most popular open source projects". The most popular repo (by stars) I have is with 3k stars. Apparently it is enough, not sure.
Re: GitHub Copilot is generally available
#39Shouldn't Copilot technically be FOSS since it trains on open source?
If it should, it's a lot more complicated than that. "Open source" isn't a boolean where as long as you share your source you're compliant. Licenses usually require that a copyright notice be redistributed along with any source code and / or attribution in other ways, sometimes they require details of any modifications, etc. They're not doing that.
Re: GitHub Copilot is generally available
#40I hope I never again have to work on a codebase/language where copilot would be worth subscribing to.
Unnecessary hate. I used it a while ago while writing some complex aggregation and grouping of data. It was pretty painful to write until I tried with Copilot and the result is both accurate and easy to read. I wrote unit tests and it's been fine ever since. This is but one example of the value of it.
I am sure some of the typical cynicism here will turn this into a protracted argument of "well maybe you shouldn't be a shit developer and you would be able to fit all the complexity in your head" but whatever.