Live data from Hacker News

GitHub Copilot Coding Agent

github.blog

261–270 of 372 posts

Re: GitHub Copilot Coding Agent

#261
post #208
post #205

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s not the implied conclusion my guy. That’s the statement.

Then what do you claim the implied conclusion is?

That the number of successful (as in, merged and works) contributions are greater than those that did not.

Re: GitHub Copilot Coding Agent

#262

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Great technical documentation rarely gets written. You can tell the LLM the audience they are targeting and it will do a reasonable job. I truly appreciate technical writers, and hold great ones in special esteem. We live in a world where the market doesn't value this.

The market value good documentation. Anything critical and commonly used is pretty well documented (linux, databases, software like Adobe's,...). You can see how many books/articles have been written about those systems.

> Anything critical and commonly used is pretty well documented

I'd argue the vast majority of software development is neither critical nor commonly used. Anecdotal, but I've written documentation and never got any feedback on it (whether it's good or bad), which implies it's not read or the quality doesn't matter.

Re: GitHub Copilot Coding Agent

#263

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If find your comment "AI Slop" in reference to technical documentation to strange. It isn't a choice between finely crafted prose versus banal text. It's documentation that exists versus documentation that doesn't exist. Or documentation that is hopelessly out of date. In my experience LLMs do a wonderful job in translating from code to documentation. It even does a good job inferring the reason for design decisions.…

> If I want well written prose I'll read literature. Actually if you want well-written prose you'll read AI slop there too. I saw people comparing their "vibe writing" workflows for their "books" on here the other day. Nothing is to be spared, apparently

A lot (I'd argue most of it) of literature written by humans is garbage.

Re: GitHub Copilot Coding Agent

#264

I tried doing some vibe coding on a greenfield project (using gemini 2.5 pro + cline). On one hand - super impressive, a major productivity booster (even compared to using a non-integrated LLM chat interface). I noticed that LLMs need a very heavy hand in guiding the architecture, otherwise they'll add architectural tech debt. One easy example is that I noticed them breaking abstractions (putting things where they do…

I've vibe coded small project as well using Claude Code. It's about visitors registration at the company. Simple project, one form, a couple of checkboxes, everything is stored in sqlite + has endpoint for getting .xlsx.

Initial cost was around $20 USD, which later grew to (mostly polishing) $40 with some manual work.

I've intentionally picked up simple stack: html+js+php.

A couple of things:

* I'd say I'm happy about the result from product's perspective * Codebase could be better, but I could not care less about in this case * By default, AI does not care about security unless I specifically tell it * Claude insisted on using old libs. When I've specifically told it to use the latest and greatest, it upgraded them but left code that works just with an old version. Also it mixed latest DaisyUI with some old version of tailwindcss :)

On one hand it was super easy and fun to do, on the other hand if I was a junior engineer, I bet it would have cost more.

Re: GitHub Copilot Coding Agent

#265

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wild take. Let’s just hand over the keys to LLMs I suppose, the fancy next token predictor is the capitan now.

Not that wild TBH. This is a common view, and I think will be the norm on the near-to-mid term, especially for basic CRUD apps and websites. Context windows are still too small for anything even slightly complex (I think we need to be at about 20m before we start match human levels), but we'll be there before you know it. Engineers will essentially become people who just guide the AIs and verify tests.

Have you ever tried to get those little bits of styrofoam completely off of a cardboard box? Have you ever seen something off in the distance and misjudged either what it was or how long it would take to get there?

Re: GitHub Copilot Coding Agent

#266

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We've been using Copilot coding agent internally at GitHub, and more widely across Microsoft, for nearly three months. That dogfooding has been hugely valuable, with tonnes of valuable feedback (and bug bashing!) that has helped us get the agent ready to launch today. So far, the agent has been used by about 400 GitHub employees in more than 300 our our repositories, and we've merged almost 1,000 pull requests contri…

Welp....Github was good product while it lasted.

Github and Copilot are separate products, nothing mandates you to use it.

Re: GitHub Copilot Coding Agent

#269
post #11
post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Once Copilot is done, it’ll tag you for review. You can ask Copilot to make changes by leaving comments in the pull request. To me, this reads like it'll be a good junior and open up a PR with its changes, letting you (the issue author) review and merge. Of course, you can just hit "merge" without looking at the changes, but then it's kinda on you when unreviewed stuff ends up in main.

A good junior has strong communication skills, humility, asks many good questions, has imagination, and a tremendous amount of human potential.

Has a point of view, a clear motive, ability to think holistically about things that are hard to digitize, get mad and clean up a bunch of stuff absolutely correctly because they're finally just "sick of all of this shit", or, conservatively isolates legacy code, studying it and creating buffering wrappers for the new system in pieces as the legacy issues are mitigated with a long term strategy. Each move is discussed with their peers. etc etc etc thank you for advocating sanity!
Post reply on HN