4 ms·

How will co-pilot understand the requirements that need to be implemented? What you described sounds like better autocomplete rather than a system that can one

• corobo 4y ago
  This is how I'd describe it too It's a surprisingly impressive autocomplete don't get me wrong, but you've still got to have someone in the pilot chair for now for sure. Sometimes it has the right spirit but the code isn't quite going to work as is
• tluyben2 4y ago
  But you don’t need millions of ‘coders’ that now have jobs basically (incredibly error prone) are playing copilot in 100000s of companies all over the world. They get told, via tasks and in detail what and how to complete the objectives and then copy/paste and alter code to try to make it work. All these people should be out of a (coding) job in 10 years. They have been saying that since the 70s (maybe before) but copilot often gives me better and more consistent code than the (Indian, but it can be anywhere; much outsourcing just went specifically there over the last 2 decades and the sweatshops are mostly there I think) sweatshop that my client hired wrote. So this is the first time that I actually see it as a real possibility to change the software dev landscape.
  • burntoutfire 4y ago
    I have never yet seen the tickets to be reasonably specced out. Quite often, they just contain a vaguest idea of what should be done (often, just two or three sentences). Everything else is for the engineer to extract via a series of follow up question from product owner and analysts.
    • tluyben2 4y ago
      Yeah, but there are layers; I have seen plenty of places where ‘top level’ engineers spec out every detail of a task for the others. Not in startups (well seen that once or twice too), but in bigger corps.