Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Learn to code, ignore AI, then use AI to code even better

kyrylo.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 150 posts

Re: Learn to code, ignore AI, then use AI to code even better

#111

Post by guappa »

grumbel wrote: post #59

Ignoring AI would be foolish, since AI is the best programming tutor you can wish for and will speed up your learning noticeably, since you can always ask for clarification or examples when something isn't clear. It's also a great way to get random data for testing. And it will help you unearth lesser known corners of a programming language that you might have overlooked otherwise. The downside is that at the current…

I wonder what kind of trivial boring jobs people who keep saying that LLMs are so incredibly useful at programming must have to have that opinion.

What does your day look like?

Re: Learn to code, ignore AI, then use AI to code even better

#112

Post by nialv7 »

Re what Replit CEO said: i mean sure, learn how to think, learn how to breakdown problems and communicate - good skills to have, regardless of AI or not. and learning how to code is one of the great ways to improve these skills. people generally aren't going to learn how to think in a vacuum, right? Math, science, and programming, among others, that's how most people learn how to think, they are not going to be a waste of time.

Re: Learn to code, ignore AI, then use AI to code even better

#114

Post by guappa »

ArthurStacks wrote: post #97

The only people saying this kind of thing are coders desperate to stay relevant. There is no future in coding. Its gone in a few years. Instead begin learning the skills required to work with AI to get it create what you want.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43504924

Re: Learn to code, ignore AI, then use AI to code even better

#115

Post by skydhash »

derekp7 wrote: post #82
chii wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That hasn't been my experience, nor that of others using the AI. It's a force constant, rather than a multiplier. If you're low skilled, asking it to do a low skilled task, it works fine. If you're high skilled, and asked it to do the low skilled task, you saved a tiny bit of time (less than that of the low skilled person). But it cannot do a high skilled task (at least, not right now). It can pretend, which can lead…

You could also be a mixed skilled developer. Good at regular code, architecture, and algorithms but not as familiar with a given UI framework. Having the LLM generate the html and css for a given layout description saves a lot of time looking through the docs.

Does it really? The thing is that there’s a domain model beneath each kind of library and if they solve the same problem, you will find that they will generally follows the same pattern.

Let’s take the web. React, Svelte, Angular, Alpine.js, all have the same problems they’re solving. Binding some kind of state to a template, handling form interactions, decompose the page into “components”,… once you got the gist of that, it’s pretty easy to learn. And if you care about your code being correct, you still have to learn the framework to avoid pitfalls.

Same things with 3D engines, audio frameworks, physic engines, math packages,…

Re: Learn to code, ignore AI, then use AI to code even better

#117

Post by morcus »

nightfox1 wrote: post #71

This resonates a lot with what I’ve seen outside of code too. I’ve been building an AI chess coach and noticed the same pattern: people plug their games into Stockfish, see a list of best moves, and walk away thinking they’ve “analyzed” the game. But real understanding — like in programming — only comes from engaging with why things went wrong. That’s what I’m trying to fix. Instead of just showing lines, my AI coach…

Seems like an interesting idea - is it only tactics in scope or has does the AI also do well at analyzing strategic ideas?

Some other thoughts:

Isn't the first example just wrong? The AI says "after dxe3 Rxd8 Rxd8, white wins the exchange, gaining a Rook for a Bishop" but unless I am mistaken actually it's a Queen for a Rook and Bishop?

Also, it seems the visual highlight AI referenced is not working? Talks about Rad1 while the pawn is still highlighted.

Re: Learn to code, ignore AI, then use AI to code even better

#118

Post by dijksterhuis »

pydry wrote: post #24
marjann wrote: post #9

The rise of tools like Cursor reminds me of the Industrial Revolution in France. When machines first appeared in factories, unskilled workers who didn’t understand how they operated often got injured - sometimes quite literally losing fingers. But for skilled craftsmen, these machines became force multipliers, dramatically increasing productivity and improving overall living standards. The same applies to software de…

As a skilled craftsman I have to say Im underwhelmed. It's not that theyre not useful at all it's just that they look more like a step change dressed up as a revolution.

aye, to me they’re just a different interface to the same information publicly available via a search engine.

for folks who haven’t spent the last 15 years honing their finding out technical information with a search engine craft i can see why they might be useful.

but a search engine won’t sometimes mangle the output and provide an incorrect answer — it only provides a link to the raw data (webpage), rather than trying to create a paragraph of text about it.

i’d rather have access to the raw data guaranteed unmangled. i’m fast enough using that method.

Re: Learn to code, ignore AI, then use AI to code even better

#119

Post by bluGill »

nkrisc wrote: post #6

If you spend time on places that attract newbie programmers (some subreddits focused on game dev or game engines, for example) you’ll see the outcome of “I no longer think you should learn to code.” And it’s not pretty. Many, many posts of people looking for help fixing AI-generated code because the AI got it wrong and they have no idea what the code even does. Much of the time the problem is simply an invented metho…

I gave up on AI because of that. The old IDEs that use an AST for autocomplete still exist and work very well for allowing me to hit tab and get the correct function filled in. They are also very good at the little pop-up that tells me details about the parameter I'm trying to fill in really is - the AI has no clue what order the arguments really are and so often gets it wrong. They won't complete 1000 lines of code - but that is only rarely a savings as most 1000 line code snippets I've worked with just as fast to write myself (I've been programming for 30 years) as to figure out how the AI got some details wrong.

If the AI had access to the AST and could know what functions exist they might be helpful. Then they could write that function they wished existed if it doesn't. However that means they need to know how to understand the code not just the structure.

Re: Learn to code, ignore AI, then use AI to code even better

#120

Post by bluGill »

dingnuts wrote: post #107
jillesvangurp wrote: post #56

I've been programming for a few decades. I love LLMs. They make tedious things quick. Help me resolve gnarly issues. Make short work of writing unit tests. Generate oodles of boilerplate at will. Etc. It makes me more productive and less reluctant to take on risky things. By risky I mean things that formerly would have likely derailed my busy schedule because I'd get side tracked for to long and would have to de-prio…

I've been programming for a few decades. I hate LLMs. They generate oodles of buggy shite that I have to fix by hand. They frequently steal my time and make me less productive because people on this site say I have to learn them or retire, and then I waste time looking up the details the bot got wrong. They're a slot machine and the people who think they are good are justifying an addiction and sunk costs. So retire…

The real answer is probably somewhere between the two. There is value in AI - and the versions that will come up in the future will be better. However it isn't nearly as valuable as the advocates say either. I've given up on the current rounds, but I'm still going to keep watching for when they get better. They might or might not get enough better before I retire (I'm likely older than you), but there are a lot of things they can do better. I have no idea how hard those things are.
Post reply on HN