31–40 of 154 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It’s worthwhile to me under specific conditions, mainly that the codebase has existing patterns and abstractions that the LLM utilizes, and they’re actually good. It’s not a common case but I’m lucky that one of the codebases I’m in is one I built myself mostly by hand, and LLMs are really effective in it at the moment. My main concern is making sure the generated code maintains the high standard, but it’s definitely…
That plus if you’ve ever stared at your code and then searched StackOverflow to see if you could find a better way of doing it, it’s like having that running continuously.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well you got me. I’d agree about that workflow, but something more rapid like a few seconds generating code and then a couple minutes reading it can be more engaging to me than writing it out yourself. I think it’s near time we all stop having such strong opinions about the matter either way personally.
[dead]
I’m not anywhere close to an AI booster but I find value in it. I think we should think of it less like some intelligent being or “agent” and more as a code generation tool. It would both be more productive and healthier.
this seems inappropriate. I think its a bad paradigm that just because you use a platform's service, they get intimate details about your usage. And for them to be so bold about publishing the statistics they've stolen from their customers data? Gives me a reason to never recommend my org use this platform.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[dead]
Writing code directly takes longer to warm up. Usually, I'd keep tens of thousands of lines in my head. In the past, I spent a lot of time designing error propagation and execution contexts. (Talented people might figure it out right away, but unfortunately I don't have that kind of talent.) So I'd have to think about things like Result and how far to propagate errors—and worry about whether my approach would conflic…
Is this sarcasm?
These days, my work has become: generate code for 20 minutes, then spend an hour reading it.
And then more hours cleaning it up and re-prompting.
I recently set up a local llm to see what the fuss is about and other than the few ringer solutions my experience is as you described. 2min promping, 5min waiting, 3hrs debugging or just doing it myself.
I am very likely doing it wrong, and it does speed up some aspects, but I wouldn't say I trust llm code any more than my own. Until it runs and throws an error, the llm is 100% confident that it has written perfect code.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
For me, coding is either a flow state (when I have huge swaths of code to write) or deeply thinking about just a few lines (mostly to figure if I caught everything). The latter case is when I procrastinate the most, because I usually have an idea of a solution, but don’t want to do the work of actually verifying if it’s correct. Using AI then is skipping the enjoyable part (writing the code) to the unpleasant part (f…
I feel similarly, but at the same time, I think I am the exact opposite. I actually find formulating hypotheses more fun. For hobby projects or things I start casually, I usually do not think about errors and such at all. When it is a tool I want to build or need for myself, I really do not care about that part. In my case, I do not contribute to open source at all. Mostly, I deliver code for factory systems or speci…
this seems inappropriate. I think its a bad paradigm that just because you use a platform's service, they get intimate details about your usage. And for them to be so bold about publishing the statistics they've stolen from their customers data? Gives me a reason to never recommend my org use this platform.
Uhh that's how a lot of economic data works too. Guess how we get a lot of jobs data... ADP