• einkorn@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    88
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    3 months ago

    For me, it is a glorified auto-complete function. Could definitely live without it.

      • MeatsOfRage@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        27
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        3 months ago

        Hell yea. Our unit test coverage went way up because you can blow through test creation in second. I had a large complicated migration from one data set to another with specific mutations based on weird rules and GPT got me 80% of the way there and with a little nudging basically got it perfect. Code that would’ve taken a few hours took about 6 prompts. If I’m curious about a new library I can get a working example right away to see how everything fits together. When these articles say there’s no benefit I feel people aren’t using these tools or don’t know how to use them effectively.

    • Kualk@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      We always have to ask what language is it auto-completing for? If it is a strictly typed language, then existing tooling is already doing everything possible and I see no need for additional improvement. If it is non-strictly typed language, then I can see how it can get a little more helpful, but without knowledge of actual context I am not sure if it can get a lot more accurate.