4 ms·
As one using tech mostly laid down in the last millennium, I also smiled at this. But I think what the poster meant was that the AI is not always "up to date".
by bruce511 1y ago
As one using tech mostly laid down in the last millennium, I also smiled at this.
But I think what the poster meant was that the AI is not always "up to date". So if my C compiler is a 2025 version, and my code makes use of features added since 2022, then the AI can "retrogress" the code simply because it isn't aware of the new.
Or another example, imagine when JavaScript Promises were new. There's a lot more examples of "not using promises" than "using promises ". So the AI us likely to use the old pattern.
If you're doing "up to the minute " code because you put the effort in to keep abreast of new stuff, then this retrograde will seem, well, frustrating.
- muzani 1y agoThis is exactly it. One of the guys we interviewed failed because he used AI. The AI gave him a stack which made it difficult to complete the task in the given time. Well, that was the story anyway. Some team members were already using AI for production code and pointed out that if he had knowledge of the good stack, he would have just asked AI to build the good stack instead of relying on it to build the whatever stack. For context, the senior interviews we give don't force tool or stack. They're problems we have trouble with. The aim is to find someone smarter than us who brings in a new tool or stack which solves this problem better. If we wanted to test promises skill, we'd give a complex async problem, like getting them to clone the box in Facebook with emoji count and stuff.