5 ms·
At the moment what the "end of programming" looks like in my experience is: * Better auto-complete for verbose languages, * A question/answer workflow signifi
by philipswood 3y ago
At the moment what the "end of programming" looks like in my experience is:
* Better auto-complete for verbose languages,
* A question/answer workflow significantly smoother than googling it,
* A on tap rookie for 5-15 line pieces of code that don't matter much (it difficult to trust more because quality isn't great),
* An awesome bash one-liner sidekick,
And most of importantly
* A consultable socrates-in-a-box "colleague" that is often useful, but needs to checked.
- p0w3n3d 3y agoI can't imagine explaining to the Socrates what I need from my bash one-liner, probably faster is to write it myself. Of course depends on complication level
- jart 3y agoI explain that to Google all the time and it just finds me someone on Stack Overflow who's figured it out already. Not to mention the dozens of other drive-by human reviewers that Stack Overflow offers. It's difficult to imagine AI improving on that. Unless it's like a Star Trek badge you talk to, and the LLM does the Google search for you and types the command into the terminal, because you're too lazy to pull out the keyboard.
- tarruda 3y ago> It's difficult to imagine AI improving on that It can be an improvement due to LLMs ability to quickly adapt any solutions to your specific use case. On Google you can search for CRUD web application examples and find tutorials but you will have to adapt to your specific scenatio. With LLMs ou can ask: "Write a CRUD web app using Next.js and postgres. I want the CRUD to manage entity A with fields x Tx, y, Ty..." and there's a good chance it will spit out a pretty good starting boilerplate.
- starbugs 3y ago> It can be an improvement due to LLMs ability to quickly adapt any solutions to your specific use case. My experience with that so far has been that, yes, that works quite well as long as the thing you ask is common and reasonably simple. The more uncommon and complex it gets, the less successful this tends to be. And in more uncommon cases, if it is successful in terms of the workability of the emitted code, it's often not clear if the approach taken is a good idea at all considering other aspects like maintainability. LLMs are notoriously bad at just saying "Hey dude, I don't really know what I am doing here, ok?" Also, I have often been able to trace their responses back directly to SO answers. Usually, there is not much "creativity" in their answers at all.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- Paradigma11 3y agoIt can also help you naming things and give you different options.
- philipswood 3y agoYeah, it's great for finding things I can describe, but not google - since I don't know or can't remember the name of.
- guappa 3y ago> An awesome bash one-liner sidekick Ah running scripts with no idea what they do… what could go wrong? :D
- philipswood 3y agoYou really have to try hard to get it NOT to explain what the script does for four or five paragraphs. And I don't trust its competence so I check what it came up with first.
- skydhash 3y agoThat assumes you have the basic knowledge of the system you’re scripting. Imagine someone with no idea of codec and containers asking for a ffmpeg script.
- pindab0ter 3y agoThis is exactly my experience and I'm loving it. The key here is that it's a source, the things it produces still need to be checked.
- pjmlp 3y agoCurrently to me it looks more like low code programming, plugging SaaS APIs driven by AI in headless MACH products.