3 ms·

How is it different from the status quo of people just doing the wrong thing or copy pasting bad code? Yes there's the whole discussion below about float curren

How is it different from the status quo of people just doing the wrong thing or copy pasting bad code? Yes there's the whole discussion below about float currency values, but I could very well see the opposite happening too, where this thing recommends better code that the person would've written otherwise.

vincnetas 5y ago
People make mistakes. With computers people make mistakes much faster :)
- k12sosse 5y ago
  To err is human. To really mess things up, you need a computer.
shadowgovt 5y ago
It seems that copilot lets one cycle through options, which is an opportunity for it to facilitate programmers moving from a naive solution to one they hadn't thought of that is more correct. (Unclear to me yet whether the design takes advantage of this opportunity)
IncRnd 5y ago
> How is it different from the status quo of people just doing the wrong thing or copy pasting bad code? Well, yes, the wrong code would be used. However - the wrong code would then become more prevelant as an answer from gh, causing more people to blindly use it. It's a self-perpetuating cycle of finding and using bad and wrong code.
- ehsankia 5y ago
  Hmm, not quite. My point was that if they aren't a good enough programmer to understand why the code is wrong, then chances are they would've written bad code or copy pasted bad code anyways. It just makes the cycle faster. And again, I could argue that the opposite could happen too, people who would otherwise have written bad code could be given suggestions of better code that they would've written.
  - IncRnd 5y ago
    > Hmm, not quite. My point was that if they aren't a good enough programmer to understand why the code is wrong, then chances are they would've written bad code or copy pasted bad code anyways. It just makes the cycle faster. No, not quite. It also makes the cycle more permanent and its results deeply ingrained, which is what is actually relevant.
    - Jcowell 5y ago
      Either way it wouldn’t matter since the only thing short of stopping the cycle is stack overflow to close down and a new stack overflow not to open up. A very unlikely scenario for this industry. Either way , no matter the difference in time frame, the result would have always been permanent.
blitz_skull 5y ago
“People can create tech debt, but robots can do it at scale.”

vincnetas 5y ago

People make mistakes. With computers people make mistakes much faster :)

k12sosse 5y ago
To err is human. To really mess things up, you need a computer.

shadowgovt 5y ago

It seems that copilot lets one cycle through options, which is an opportunity for it to facilitate programmers moving from a naive solution to one they hadn't thought of that is more correct. (Unclear to me yet whether the design takes advantage of this opportunity)

IncRnd 5y ago

> How is it different from the status quo of people just doing the wrong thing or copy pasting bad code? Well, yes, the wrong code would be used. However - the wrong code would then become more prevelant as an answer from gh, causing more people to blindly use it. It's a self-perpetuating cycle of finding and using bad and wrong code.

ehsankia 5y ago
Hmm, not quite. My point was that if they aren't a good enough programmer to understand why the code is wrong, then chances are they would've written bad code or copy pasted bad code anyways. It just makes the cycle faster. And again, I could argue that the opposite could happen too, people who would otherwise have written bad code could be given suggestions of better code that they would've written.
- IncRnd 5y ago
  > Hmm, not quite. My point was that if they aren't a good enough programmer to understand why the code is wrong, then chances are they would've written bad code or copy pasted bad code anyways. It just makes the cycle faster. No, not quite. It also makes the cycle more permanent and its results deeply ingrained, which is what is actually relevant.
  - Jcowell 5y ago
    Either way it wouldn’t matter since the only thing short of stopping the cycle is stack overflow to close down and a new stack overflow not to open up. A very unlikely scenario for this industry. Either way , no matter the difference in time frame, the result would have always been permanent.

blitz_skull 5y ago

“People can create tech debt, but robots can do it at scale.”