you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 6 points 1 year ago (5 children)

But surely you test the code and review it, right? That's how you reinstate trust in what it outputs?

Disclaimer: I've never used AI to code, not even copilot.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Based on my coworkers... no.

    They get the Ai to write the code, and the tests.

    Then hand it over to me to review and test.

    Its all overly verbose, does things that are not required or desirable, and insists on re-writing existing code to match its own style.

    I hate it passionately.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago

    Damn. 😢

    Sounds awful. I would just reject these PRs, dude. Tell them that AI is good for scaffolding and creating a draft, but you gotta maintain the human quality assurance, and that's not your job, it's theirs.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago* (1 child)

    You mean rewrite it all from scratch? If you have any kind of standards that is what you end up doing. If you know what you’re doing you do it right the first time and move on. Using AI for coding it like trying to babysit the most inept, inexperienced intern to ever walk the earth. It wastes time and the end result is far worse.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago

    It'll sometimes do dumb and/or redundant or too complicated shit. Pile up a couple of those and your codebase can get unmaintainable fast.

    I find if you give it small chunks and keep an eye on it, it's great.

    I think one of my recent prompts was "Create a procedure that creates an example configuration file with placeholder values. If a config file doesn't exist on start, give a warning and create the example config."

    It also works great as a replacement for an ORM.

  • source
  • parent