3 ms·
I use them all the time with success. For copilot it’s very useful for writing tests and autocompleting repetitive code. Like writing a Typescript interface tha
by teaearlgraycold 4y ago
I use them all the time with success. For copilot it’s very useful for writing tests and autocompleting repetitive code. Like writing a Typescript interface that matches a JSON object, or listing properties of an object into an array. ChatGPT is at worst a good rubber duck, and at best a superpowered documentation tool. If I ever get confused by docker or some popular JavaScript library it’s able to give me a custom tailored answer that usually solves my problem on the first or second try.
Neither of them are any good at just writing a ton of code (unless the code is mostly boilerplate). But they’re amazing keystroke savers and a next generation stack overflow.
- danenania 4y agoWhat would be amazing for Copilot + Typescript is if it could somehow integrate with the TS compiler (or perhaps just get sufficient fine-tuning on the TS type system) so that it only generates valid/type-safe suggestions.
- FractalHQ 4y agoI think about this often. If copilot could hook into the Typescript language server, it would be much less likely to hallucinate and generate blatantly wrong suggestions.
- 8organicbits 4y agoHow often are you seeing bogus documentation? I see that concern often mentioned. I tried ChatGPT and the first question got an obviously wrong answer. That seems worse than stackoverflow to me. Maybe I'm not holding it right?
- teaearlgraycold 4y agoI think it entirely depends on how popular the library is. React for example is so common online that GPT has the whole API figured out. Even if it’s wrong the stakes are low. Just paste the error back into the chat and it will give you an alternative. But the real solution here is the new Copilot X for docs. Feed in the code base and all documentation and now you have the real source of truth at the helm.