5 ms·

I find copilot a much better booster simply because I'm much better at writing code than writing gpt prompts and it's much more streamlined. There were a few c

I find copilot a much better booster simply because I'm much better at writing code than writing gpt prompts and it's much more streamlined. There were a few cases where GPT/chat interface was better but I'd say it's 95/5%. I'm hoping copilot x will be more streamlined. If it is it's easily >100$/month

weatherlite 4y ago
It would have been nice if I could tell CoPilot what I am trying to do instead of going to the web and talk to ChatGPT
- simplify 4y ago
  You can. Just write a descriptive comment, enter a newline, and it will attempt to autocomplete the code for you.
  - weatherlite 4y ago
    Tried it a few times didn't work well but I will try again...
  - nomel 4y ago
    I don't think they're comparable. I work in test automation, with equipment and devices. I can describe an equipment setup, and how the device is connected, and it'll write the relatively appropriate code, with electrical engineering concepts in mind. I can ask it if there are any concerns with the setup, or signal integrity, what to do about it, all with good answers. A CoPilot comment can't do that.
  - SkyPuncher 4y ago
    It's really hit or miss. I had one case where I needed state management in a really simple react app. It created an entire reducer for me, from scratch. Handled all the boilerplate cases, I'd expect. I've also had cases where it struggles to built a from button.
    - everforward 4y ago
      My experience is that it does much better with specific things than general. It does better in statically typed languages than dynamic, and it does better with functions that do a specific small thing than something more fuzzy. I.e. it does well at writing the body of a function that retrieves data from SQL and returns a particular type, and it does poorly at parsing strings of varying formats. I'm not super surprised it does well at reducers and poorly at form buttons.
holoduke 4y ago
I would be nice if you could simply add lines in your code like #askgpt: can you fill in the method on line 345. It needs to calculate x. Input is y. Output is z. So you dont have to go out.

weatherlite 4y ago

It would have been nice if I could tell CoPilot what I am trying to do instead of going to the web and talk to ChatGPT

simplify 4y ago
You can. Just write a descriptive comment, enter a newline, and it will attempt to autocomplete the code for you.
- weatherlite 4y ago
  Tried it a few times didn't work well but I will try again...
- nomel 4y ago
  I don't think they're comparable. I work in test automation, with equipment and devices. I can describe an equipment setup, and how the device is connected, and it'll write the relatively appropriate code, with electrical engineering concepts in mind. I can ask it if there are any concerns with the setup, or signal integrity, what to do about it, all with good answers. A CoPilot comment can't do that.
- SkyPuncher 4y ago
  It's really hit or miss. I had one case where I needed state management in a really simple react app. It created an entire reducer for me, from scratch. Handled all the boilerplate cases, I'd expect. I've also had cases where it struggles to built a from button.
  - everforward 4y ago
    My experience is that it does much better with specific things than general. It does better in statically typed languages than dynamic, and it does better with functions that do a specific small thing than something more fuzzy. I.e. it does well at writing the body of a function that retrieves data from SQL and returns a particular type, and it does poorly at parsing strings of varying formats. I'm not super surprised it does well at reducers and poorly at form buttons.

holoduke 4y ago

I would be nice if you could simply add lines in your code like #askgpt: can you fill in the method on line 345. It needs to calculate x. Input is y. Output is z. So you dont have to go out.