3 ms·
Ok i get the skepticism but what i liked about their description is that it's not the overblown hysterical "AI superhuman programmer" pitch, but a more modest "
by twelve40 3y ago
Ok i get the skepticism but what i liked about their description is that it's not the overblown hysterical "AI superhuman programmer" pitch, but a more modest "junior" angle. If they keep looking for something that clicks, there are lots of "junior" niches that could be filled - for example, I can see that thing automatically working to beef up the test coverage. It's kind of difficult to screw up tests, the potential fallout is low and there is a unambiguous number (coverage) as the success criteria. If we look around our daily developer lives, there might be more cases that could be automated with this, even if it doesn't ever become good enough for any general programming.
- williamzeng0 3y agoSomething I'm a big fan of is making a small successful ticket (for example migrate the functions in one file) and then applying it map-reduce style across the entire codebase. This could help a lot, and by definition addresses repetitive work. We have this (to some degree) with issue templates, where you can pre-populate some text and fill in the rest. We're also thinking about good ways to offload that work to Sweep.