Earlier quoted context omitted.
I’m not seeing any evidence that any of this is actually good for Google’s business. Their observations that half of code checked in is from suggestions by an LLM is not really surprising in a regimented dev platform with tons of boilerplate. That stat tells us nothing about actual code quality, development velocity, or skill curves over time, much less business impact. What product of Google’s has been improved by t…
Xoogler here. This exactly. There is so much boilerplate involved in writing anything inside Google. AI was great to cut that down a bit. It's still nowhere near what it's like in the outside and/or non-Java world. Which isn't to say that this isn't progress - just that that stat should be taken with context.
Code is read more than it's written. And it should be written to be read.
If you are barfing out a lot of auto-completed stuff, it's probably not very easy to read.
You have to read code to maintain it, modify it, analyze its performance, handle production incidents, etc.