3 ms·
What's wrong with using it for boilerplate ? It costs 10$/month and probably saves me hours in stupid boilerplate, not just because it reduces typing but becau
by moonchrome 4y ago
What's wrong with using it for boilerplate ?
It costs 10$/month and probably saves me hours in stupid boilerplate, not just because it reduces typing but because the kind of typing it fixes is the boring stuff that gets me out of flow.
And boilerplate is a vague term, good example of copilot "AI" features :
function(a, b, c, d) {
if(a ...) { ..
}
if(b // starts generalizing from a case but is very context aware
// here it's already doing c and d
}
and we can be talking about very non-trivial permutations here where it's obvious from context what you want to do but generalizing to cover all cases would be more work than just writing it.
And tests - sometimes it can generate a correct test with mocks just from function name, sometimes it's garbage - but it's really easy to glance at which it is.
My current experience with copilot for ~2 months is that it's really good at such boilerplate, it's annoying when it's late or fails at what I expect it but, and it makes generating boilerplate code very cheap so it can lead to a lot of duplication.
If you're good enough you know to pick up when you should apply DRY and when not, you'll get a feel when copilot is useful and it will be a decent productivity boost IMO. If they made it faster and more reliable (just for the cases I already use it for) I would pay >100$ month out of pocket for sure.