• philm
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    It could definitely use integration with a linter so it doesn’t generate subtle bugs around generative naming mismatching actual methods/variables, but it’s become remarkably good, particularly in the past few weeks.

    Maybe I should try it again, I doubt thought that it really helps me, I’m a fast typer, and I don’t like to be interrupted by something wrong all the time (or not really useful) when I have a creative phase (a good LSP like rust-analyzer seems to be a sweet spot I think). And something like copilot seems to just confuse me all the time, either by showing plain wrong stuff, or something like: what does it want? ahh makes sense -> why this way, that way is better (then writing instead how I would’ve done it), so I’ll just skip that part for more complex stuff at least.

    But it would be interesting how it may look like with code that’s a little bit less exotic/living on the edge of the language. Like typical frontend or backend stuff.

    In what context are you using it, that it provides good results?

    I would actually encourage it to be extremely verbose with comments

    Yeah I don’t know, I’m not writing the code to feed it to an LLM, I like to write it for humans, with good function doc (for humans), I hope that an LLM is smart enough at some day to get the context. And that may be soon enough, but til then, I don’t see a real benefit of LLMs for code (other than (imprecise) boilerplate generators).