3 ms·
I think that Copilot is much better/more promising for this kind of thing because it's looking at the code you've already written without you having to constant
by mason55 3y ago
I think that Copilot is much better/more promising for this kind of thing because it's looking at the code you've already written without you having to constantly prompt it.
I had a lot of the same hangups as you when I had played around with ChatGPT. How do I get it to handle the monotonous stuff without me having to spend all my time teaching it?
I finally tried Copilot the other day and it was stunning. I had a half-written golang client that was a wrapper around an undocumented and poorly structured API for a tool we use. I had written the get and create methods. Then I added a comment with an example URL for delete and Copilot auto-completed the entire method in the same style as the two methods I had already written. In some cases, like formatting & error handling, it was exactly the same as what I'd written, but other cases, like variable naming, string templating, etc., it replicated the spirit of my style but adapted for this new "delete" method.
I think ChatGPT is just the wrong interface for this kind of thing (at least right now).
- Filligree 3y agoThey’re complementary, I’d say. GPT-4 handles greenfield development better; you can tell it to write a quick script, and usually it more or less works. Copilot doesn’t do much when you’re looking at a blank page. This would make copilot the better tool in 90% of cases, but I’ve been using GPT-4 to script a lot of things I previously would never have scripted at all. It reduces the cost to where even one-off scripts for a twenty minute job are usually worth writing.