4 ms·
I get what you're saying about 10 lines of well-tested vs 10,000 lines of crud, but this hyperbole is also a false dichotomy. GPT-4 and Copilot absolutly makes
by malux85 3y ago
I get what you're saying about 10 lines of well-tested vs 10,000 lines of crud, but this hyperbole is also a false dichotomy.
GPT-4 and Copilot absolutly makes me more productive as a programmer, wiring all the tests, getting maybe 80% of them right and then I fix them up. I am not producing 10,000 lines of crud, but I AM producing 1000 lines of test-covered code, I'm doing the hard bits, and the AIs are doing the menial parts.
I am by far the most productive programmer on the team however you measure it (we have about 60 different metrics available to management) and a large part of this is be having enough energy to always be attacking the hard problems, because I am not wasting mind power and time writing the trivial bits that can be automated.
Does it get it right every time? Nope. Does it make hilariously wrong mistakes? Yep, about once or twice a day! Is it worth it? Absolutly.
- dx034 3y agoI'm completely with you. But 60 metrics for management to track programmers? That honestly doesn't sound like a great work environment.
- malux85 3y agoIt is great, I use them to self improve all the time, I like things that are critical of me, or show me where I am weak. Everyone (including management) is aware of all of the tropes and cliches about how metrics cease to be good when they become targets and how metrics can be gamed blah blah blah - we all know that - and have imbibed that, but the rationale is that more (but imperfect) visibility is better than no visibility or solely subjective interpretations. As long as all metrics are assumed to be wrong until proven correct, with some digging, some thorough analysis and a judicious and abundant use of the benefit of the doubt, I find them really helpful.