3 ms·
So, I am paying $20, for a glorified code generator, that may or may not be correct, to write a small function that I can do for free, and be confident about th
by t_mahmood 1y ago
So, I am paying $20, for a glorified code generator, that may or may not be correct, to write a small function that I can do for free, and be confident about the correctness, if I have not been lazy to implement a test for it.
If you point out, with test it's also the same with any AI tool available, but to come to that result, I have to continuously prompt it till it gives me the desired output, while I may be able to do it in 2/3 iterations.
Reading documentation always made me little bit knowledgeable than before, while prompting the LLM, gives me nothing of knowledge.
And, I also have to decide which LLM would be good for the task at hand, and most of them will not be free (unless I use a local, but that will also use GPU, and add an energy cost)
I may be nitpicking, but I see too many holes with this approach
- stavros 1y agoThe biggest hole you don't see is that it's worth the $20 to make me overcome my laziness, because I don't like writing code, but I like making stuff, and this way I can make stuff while fooling my brain into thinking I'm not writing code.
- t_mahmood 1y agoSure, that can be a point, which is helping you overcome your personal barrier, But that can be anything, That is not you were vouching for on the original comment. It was about saving time.
- weard_beard 1y agoNot only that, but the process described is how you train a junior dev. There, at least, the wasted time results in the training of a human being who can become sophisticated enough to become a trusted independent implementer in a relatively short duration
- turtlebits 1y agoYour time isn't free, and I'd certainly with more than $20/month. I find it extremely useful as a smarter autocomplete, especially for the tedious work - changing function definitions, updating queries when DB schema changes, and writing http requests/api calls from vendor/library documentation.
- t_mahmood 1y agoCertainly, So I use an IDE, IntelliJ Ultimate to be precise. None of the use-cases you mention requires LLM. Just available as IDE functionalities. IntelliJ has LLM based auto complete, with which I am okay, But it still wrong too many times. Works extremely well with Rust. Their non-llm autocomplete is also superb, which uses ML for suggesting closest, relevant match, IIRC. It also makes refactoring a breeze, I know what it's going to do exactly. Also, it can handle database refactoring to a certain capacity! And for that it does not require LLM, so no nondeterministic behavior. Also, the IDE have its own way of doing http requests, and it's really nice! But, I can use their live template to do autocomplete any boilerplate code. It only requires setting once. No need to fiddle with prompts.