3 ms·
Good point about program traces. Another area I wish Copilot understood: where my cursor will go next. Right now it can only feed me new lines, but I bet the u
by PoignardAzur 3y ago
Good point about program traces.
Another area I wish Copilot understood: where my cursor will go next. Right now it can only feed me new lines, but I bet the underlying LLM is already powerful enough that with little fine-tuning, it could guess that after I edit a call to foobar() to add an argument the next thing I'll do is probably edit the definition of foobar.
It feels like there's a trove of UX improvements in there; we've barely scratched the surface.
- actionfromafar 3y agoIDEs already has this built in. The problem is more an effect of us deciding that source code is text instead of something integrated, like Smalltalk.
- PoignardAzur 3y agoWell yeah, but IDEs have code completion built-in as well. My point is, I think Copilot-style tools could do more that insert text. They could recommend lines of code to remove, give you a quick keyboard shortcut to "place cursor in next file / line you're likely to want to edit", etc. IDEs can do some rigid versions of that (eg "Jump to next diagnostic", "Refactor", "Jump to implementation", etc) but Copilot could be the more general, more powerful version of these features.