I think an interesting use for copilot would be to ask it to find a bug given the description of an observed behavior. Let's say you're not super familiar with

I think an interesting use for copilot would be to ask it to find a bug given the description of an observed behavior. Let's say you're not super familiar with a code base, but yet you have found a bug (or "feature") that should be addressed. Having copilot narrow in on the logical code points to potentially address the issue would be invaluable. Additionally, I find the copilot code suggestions during code reviews / pull requests sometimes useful. At times, it can offer some insightful bits about a code segment, such as potential exception handling fixes, etc. I'd like to explore having copilot write unit tests, including representative test data, that can execute edge code paths. I haven't done this yet, but this seems exactly the type of thing that a "copilot" would do for me (not too unlike paired-programming, maybe). Having a copilot completely write my code base, that's another thing entirely. There would be too much going back and verifying that it got it right. And additionally, I've seen it completely conjure up bogus solutions as well. For example, I've had copilot offer a configuration change that was completely fabricated; it looked legitimate enough that a senior systems engineer attempted to install/deliver the "fix" it offered when the suggestion was completely made up. Overall, I guess my experience with copilot is not much different than working with any human. Trust but verify.