I haven't used the new assistants that much yet, but my impression so far is that automatic suggestions is a bad idea (at least for me). I'd rather trigger it e

I haven't used the new assistants that much yet, but my impression so far is that automatic suggestions is a bad idea (at least for me). I'd rather trigger it explicitly. That way one can afford a bit more compute per suggestion as well. I think you would get a feel for when the suggestions will be useful and when they won't. One feature I think could be useful is to ask it to correct very basic errors in a section of code, but this need to be well-integrated in the editor to be worth it. This could also be automatic (the detection) - like an slightly more intelligent jetbrains inspection. I've also tried some "whole program" synthesis with mixed results. It usually can get something up and running, but almost every time it has had subtle bugs in it - fixing these (with or without the AI) often got me close or higher to what it would have taken me to do it from scratch. The advantage(?) is I might never have bothered beginning from scratch - getting the first rough draft get you immediately into iteration mode. As an example - I asked GPT-4 to write a python program reading in a json file conforming to a jsonchema[1] and transforming this into a GPX file. It ended up generating code trying to get `properties` keys from the json *file*. So it clearly did not understand the schema. Maybe jsonschema is to obscure? [1] (I provided the schema and a link to the schema standard (though I'm not sure it actually read the link))