4 ms·

I think software engineering will just go up the stack to requirements engineering. Those requirements will be specified as tests or in a very high level langu

I think software engineering will just go up the stack to requirements engineering. Those requirements will be specified as tests or in a very high level language that doesn't allow for ambiguous meanings. Which is essentially another programming language just more high level.

idle_zealot 3y ago
I basically agree. We'll have AI create some very high-level programming languages that suit various ways of specifying problems precisely, then program in those. Of course, the AI will also know how program in these languages, which will make development very accessible as you could describe a problem vaguely in natural language, get a specific solution back, then confirm it works for your needs or tweak it until it's suitable.
aerhardt 3y ago
I agree, and I’m thrilled about it. I love programming but while I’ve had bouts of enjoyment coding “in the small”, it’s my least favorite part. I love systems and software architecture, and seeing things come to life above all else. ChatGPT is greatly improving my enjoyment of it all. I also doubt traditional programming languages are going anywhere in the short term, seeing there are trillions of lines of code for critical systems in the wild. Good luck replacing that in a few years only, or fully delegating its maintenance to Devin.
- junior44660 3y ago
  > I love programming but while I’ve had bouts of enjoyment coding “in the small”, it’s my least favorite part. Yes, okay, but what will happen to junior to mid level engineers? In many companies these levels can't even have an influence on architecture.
flir 3y ago
If the hypothetical high level language doesn't allow for ambiguous meanings, you can write a compiler for it and you don't need the AI. (Not saying you're wrong about "higher and higher levels of abstraction" - that's the way it's always been - but the unique promise of AI is the ability to deal with ambiguity in the requirements).
- UK-Al05 3y ago
  Ambiguity in requirements is where the majority of bugs come from now. So I don't think AI would improve things.
  - flir 3y ago
    Assuming a (hypothetical, doubtful) AI as good as a human programmer, I think the advantage becomes speed. Think of it like a REPL that you program in English. Patching ambiguities with "Oh, I didn't mean X, I meant Y" becomes the work of minutes, not hours.
    - skydhash 3y ago
      In this case, you don’t really need AI. People like Forth and Lisp because you can built an efficient DSL which you can converse with. What people have trouble with is formalism, and logical and abstract reasoning.
    - internet101010 3y ago
      Exactly. There will be a lot less of the "we will have to look into it" 2-day lag time.

idle_zealot 3y ago

I basically agree. We'll have AI create some very high-level programming languages that suit various ways of specifying problems precisely, then program in those. Of course, the AI will also know how program in these languages, which will make development very accessible as you could describe a problem vaguely in natural language, get a specific solution back, then confirm it works for your needs or tweak it until it's suitable.

aerhardt 3y ago

I agree, and I’m thrilled about it. I love programming but while I’ve had bouts of enjoyment coding “in the small”, it’s my least favorite part. I love systems and software architecture, and seeing things come to life above all else. ChatGPT is greatly improving my enjoyment of it all. I also doubt traditional programming languages are going anywhere in the short term, seeing there are trillions of lines of code for critical systems in the wild. Good luck replacing that in a few years only, or fully delegating its maintenance to Devin.

junior44660 3y ago
> I love programming but while I’ve had bouts of enjoyment coding “in the small”, it’s my least favorite part. Yes, okay, but what will happen to junior to mid level engineers? In many companies these levels can't even have an influence on architecture.

flir 3y ago

If the hypothetical high level language doesn't allow for ambiguous meanings, you can write a compiler for it and you don't need the AI. (Not saying you're wrong about "higher and higher levels of abstraction" - that's the way it's always been - but the unique promise of AI is the ability to deal with ambiguity in the requirements).

UK-Al05 3y ago
Ambiguity in requirements is where the majority of bugs come from now. So I don't think AI would improve things.
- flir 3y ago
  Assuming a (hypothetical, doubtful) AI as good as a human programmer, I think the advantage becomes speed. Think of it like a REPL that you program in English. Patching ambiguities with "Oh, I didn't mean X, I meant Y" becomes the work of minutes, not hours.
  - skydhash 3y ago
    In this case, you don’t really need AI. People like Forth and Lisp because you can built an efficient DSL which you can converse with. What people have trouble with is formalism, and logical and abstract reasoning.
  - internet101010 3y ago
    Exactly. There will be a lot less of the "we will have to look into it" 2-day lag time.