2 ms·
Sometimes its faster I write it, sometimes its not. I prompt like: give me go structs for this json "pasted json" and write 2 functions to save it and load it
by hoppp 1y ago
Sometimes its faster I write it, sometimes its not.
I prompt like: give me go structs for this json "pasted json" and write 2 functions to save it and load it from "nosql db I use"
That basically speeds up writing glue code
The business logic I write myself
Its faster to do the business logic myself than review what the Ai did.
- cratermoon 1y ago> give me go structs for this json "pasted json" and write 2 functions to save it and load it from "nosql db I use" Those tools existed before LLMs and were local, fast, and most importantly free. Why people continue to re-invent tools and workflows we already have, I don't know. Perhaps they just like to be able say "but this uses AI!"
- hoppp 1y agoIt was an example I only use what I need, plain and simple, and its free yup, works local too. Llms suck at large projects, so I break it down to small simple things, what I wrote is an example of a small thing, I keep the tasks that large. I can write my own code. I just use LLMs to speed up. I use whatever workflow suits me the most and saves me from typing much Code generating with LLMs is a reinvention of local tools that used to generate code, yes. Its an advanced autocomplete. But give me another tool that can generate code from natural language full of typos. I dont think your claim that it existed before llms is correct at all. Ever code generation task could be handwritten to be reusable but that takes developer hours
- cratermoon 1y ago> give me another tool that can generate code from natural language full of typos Give me a tool that doesn't generate code full of errors.