3 ms·
Probably about 3 minutes? That's my main usage of these types of coding tools, honestly. I already know generally what I want to happen and validating that the
by CGamesPlay 2y ago
Probably about 3 minutes? That's my main usage of these types of coding tools, honestly. I already know generally what I want to happen and validating that the LLM is on the right track / reached the right solution is easy.
I'm not saying that "Claude Code makes me 300% more effective", but I guess it did for this (simple) task.
- off_by_inf 2y agoAnd how long would it take you to debug AI generated code again and again?
- Maxatar 2y agoThis shouldn't be factored in unless you never debug your own code. At any rate, I don't know about OP but usually when I get an LLM to write out some code, I also have it write out the tests for it as well.
- generic92034 2y agoAre you comparing only the generation time with your coding time? How are the figures if you include the necessary step of checking the generated code? And how do these times change if you are coding in a very complex environment?
- CGamesPlay 2y agoTo be clear, I explicitly picked this task because my judgement call was that it was going to be faster to use an AI than coding it myself. Checking the generated code was easy for me to do (whether I or the AI wrote it). I don't know what you mean by "how do these times change if you are coding in a very complex environment", but to restate my original post: I'm fearful that Claude's additional autonomy will allow it to waste money (and time) pursuing useless ideas.
- lgas 2y agoAs I can attest to, personally, it even allows the human operators to waste money (and time) pursuing all sorts of larks :)