22 ms·

Let me give you an example from yesterday. I was learning tailwind and had a really long class attribute on a div which I didn't like. I wanted to split it and

Let me give you an example from yesterday. I was learning tailwind and had a really long class attribute on a div which I didn't like. I wanted to split it and found a way to do it using my JavaScript framework (the new way to do it was suggested by deepseek). When I started writing by hand the list of classes in the new format copilot gave me an auto complete suggestion after I wrote the first class. I pressed tab and it was done. I showed this to my new colleague who is a bit older than me and sort of had similar attitudes as you. He told me he can do the same with some multi cursor shenanigans and I'll be honest in that I wasn't interested in his approach. Seems like he would've taken more time to solve the same problem even though he had superior technique than me. He said sure it takes longer but I need to verify by reading the whole class list and that's a pain but I just reloaded the page and it was fine. He still wasn't comfortable with me using copilot. So yes, it does make me lazier but you could say the same about using go instead of C or any higher level abstraction. These tools will only get better and more correct. It's our job to figure out where it is appropriate to use them and where it isn't. Going to either extremes is where the issue is

hollowturtle 2y ago
Remember though that lazyness, as I learned in computing, is kinda "doing something later": you might have pushed the change/fix faster than your senior fellow programmer, but you still need to review and test that change right? Maybe the change you're talking about was really trivial and you just needed to refresh your browser to see a trivial change, but when it's not, being lazy about a change will only gets you suffer more when reviewing a pr and testing the non trivial change working for thousands customers with different devices
- jack_pp 2y ago
  The problem is he wasn't comfortable with my solution even though it was clearly faster and it could be tested instantly. It's a mental block for him and a lot of people in this industry. I don't advocate blindly trusting LLMs. I don't either and of course test whatever it spits out.
  - layer8 2y ago
    Testing usually isn’t enough if you don’t understand the solution in the first place. Testing is a sanity check for a solution that you do understand. Testing can’t prove correctness, it can only rind (some) errors. LLMs are fine for inspiration in developing a solution.
skydhash 2y ago
I wouldn’t say it’s laziness. The thing is that every line of code is a burden as it’s written once, but will be read and edited many times. You should write the bare amount that makes the project work, then make it readable and then easily editable (for maintenance). There are many books written about the last part as it’s the hardest. When you take all three in consideration, an llm won’t really matter unless you don’t know much about the language or the libraries. When people goes on about Vim or Emacs, it’s just that it makes the whole thing go faster.

hollowturtle 2y ago

Remember though that lazyness, as I learned in computing, is kinda "doing something later": you might have pushed the change/fix faster than your senior fellow programmer, but you still need to review and test that change right? Maybe the change you're talking about was really trivial and you just needed to refresh your browser to see a trivial change, but when it's not, being lazy about a change will only gets you suffer more when reviewing a pr and testing the non trivial change working for thousands customers with different devices

jack_pp 2y ago
The problem is he wasn't comfortable with my solution even though it was clearly faster and it could be tested instantly. It's a mental block for him and a lot of people in this industry. I don't advocate blindly trusting LLMs. I don't either and of course test whatever it spits out.
- layer8 2y ago
  Testing usually isn’t enough if you don’t understand the solution in the first place. Testing is a sanity check for a solution that you do understand. Testing can’t prove correctness, it can only rind (some) errors. LLMs are fine for inspiration in developing a solution.

skydhash 2y ago

I wouldn’t say it’s laziness. The thing is that every line of code is a burden as it’s written once, but will be read and edited many times. You should write the bare amount that makes the project work, then make it readable and then easily editable (for maintenance). There are many books written about the last part as it’s the hardest. When you take all three in consideration, an llm won’t really matter unless you don’t know much about the language or the libraries. When people goes on about Vim or Emacs, it’s just that it makes the whole thing go faster.