81–90 of 131 posts
I have to ask the obvious question, with GPT4 able to write code to solve the problem itself, why would I bother searching for existing code?
numToString() numberToString() parseNumberToString()
Where to go next? A Toolformer that calls an AST parser. In VS Code I am running Copilot and IntelliSense side by side. Two competing tab completions -- ridiculous. They should be integrated. I want a Copilot that listens to the interpreter / compiler, so that it only makes correct suggestions.
I can't stand how co-pilot hijacks the standard code completion, often overriding the typescript completion I actually want or generating something distracting. There should be a way to only run completions when prompted. Please upvote this issue if you run into the same problems: https://github.com/community/community/discussions/9817
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm interested why this made a difference to you. If you are concerned about sharing code with Bloop/OpenAI, isn't sharing code during use as bad as sharing it at index time? The more you use it, the more of your code will be exposed...
Only code in the search space is. If it were an "index in the cloud" product, one mistake and I lose the codebase. If it is a "query exposes a portion", a mistake in where I use it exposes a piece. If I can contain the blast radius of my errors my error budget is more available.
I don’t understand these new saas that rely on GPT. It surely is my lack of understanding, but since the interface to GPT is mainly text: why any company would pay for N different GPT saas (e.g., one for searching for code, another for searching for documentation on confluence, another for allowing your business analysts with their queries, etc.)? Wouldn’t it make more sense for any company to have only ONE interface…
To me, your question seems to boil down to the economics of vertical integration. Two thoughts: First, GPT is all marginal cost, no fixed cost. So the marginal economics of 1 super app vs 10 specialized mini apps is roughly the same. Second, imagine the same argument applied to a utility like electricity. "Why would any company pay for lightbulbs from one company, HVAC from a second company, and appliances from a thi…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
We currently support Go, JS/TS, JSX/TSX, Python, Rust, C#, Java, C/C++
This is a very competent set of supported languages for a startup. I think it would be stronger marketing to just list them out, and to omit the repetition of JSX/JS, TSX/TS. If I see "10+ languages" but it's actually 10, no wait, actually 8, then I'm just getting progressively let down.
I don’t understand these new saas that rely on GPT. It surely is my lack of understanding, but since the interface to GPT is mainly text: why any company would pay for N different GPT saas (e.g., one for searching for code, another for searching for documentation on confluence, another for allowing your business analysts with their queries, etc.)? Wouldn’t it make more sense for any company to have only ONE interface…
You are not wrong on this one. The moat they are going to build is going to incredibly ... low. The main intelligence is going to be provided by GPT models.
It will be interesting to see how fast these tools grow, and how they can add value beyond a purposeful UI.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Only code in the search space is. If it were an "index in the cloud" product, one mistake and I lose the codebase. If it is a "query exposes a portion", a mistake in where I use it exposes a piece. If I can contain the blast radius of my errors my error budget is more available.
Makes sense. But since you don't know what's in the search radius, you might still get surprised.
I don’t understand these new saas that rely on GPT. It surely is my lack of understanding, but since the interface to GPT is mainly text: why any company would pay for N different GPT saas (e.g., one for searching for code, another for searching for documentation on confluence, another for allowing your business analysts with their queries, etc.)? Wouldn’t it make more sense for any company to have only ONE interface…
If it’s just appending a prompt to chatgpt then it’s certainly useless
I don’t understand these new saas that rely on GPT. It surely is my lack of understanding, but since the interface to GPT is mainly text: why any company would pay for N different GPT saas (e.g., one for searching for code, another for searching for documentation on confluence, another for allowing your business analysts with their queries, etc.)? Wouldn’t it make more sense for any company to have only ONE interface…