4 ms·
It's really good at writing code.
by post-it 2mo ago
It's really good at writing code.
- aaronblohowiak 2mo agoIt’s good at all kinds of stuff that is search adjacent, “find amesent parks with water feature within 100 miles of me that have rv parking nearby”, etc
- wegwerf17377382 2mo agoThis will of course never be underminded by aggressive marketing
- gosub100 2mo agoRote classification doesn't require AI. You described a SELECT statement that was developed half a century ago
- skydhash 2mo agoPseudo SQL select l.id, l.name from locations as l where l.type = 'amusement_park' and exists ( select id from locations as l2 where l2.type = 'rv_parking' and distance(l2.geo, l.geo) < $nearby_distance ) But what we should have is a good map software where you could filter by type and distance (How many amusement parks can be in that circle?) and quickly check if there's a RV parking nearby. The hard job is collecting the data.
- champagnepapi 2mo agoEhhhhh it’s faster at typing code. Writing in a full agentic mode, we’ve only experienced slop.
- inigyou 2mo agoIf typing is the bottleneck you're working in too low-level of a language. Use more abstraction.
- loloquwowndueo 2mo agoIt’s really good at writing bad code - something that superficially works but is badly architected, abstracted, or wrong in a subtle way. Only a novice would look at ai code and say “wow this is good”.
- bashwizard 2mo agoSkill issue. No pun intended.
- rnd33 2mo agoFor well-scoped tasks I wouldn't say the code is bad, not brilliant for sure, but definitively good enough. For a lot of problems "quick and good enough" is all that is required. I've used it a lot for managing my Home Assistant setup. Has saved me countless of hours. In principle I could've done it myself, but I never would have, the time investment required to learn it wouldn't have been worth the value I get from it.
- sneak 2mo agoI’ve been programming professionally for 29 years and with the right constraints (strongly typed language, strict linting, adversarial review styleguide, test coverage, clearly defined spec or requirements) it does indeed regularly write good code. All of the other stuff required is either set-once-and-forget or is also AI, and it does require supervision, but it writes good code the vast majority of the time. Note that I am talking about frontier models and only the last 6-12 months. Opus was really the breakthrough point for me.
- loloquwowndueo 2mo agoI’ve been programming professionally for 31 years. With all those guardrails it writes functional code - but I would still not call it good. But hey to each their own.
- ff317 2mo agoI think of the distinction here is about the domains we're coding within. If your software projects are product-y CRUD apps/sites... well, LLMs will tend to perform decently at that, because it's fundamentally pretty trivial work anyways, and there are so many examples to draw from. All CRUD apps are essentially isomorphic, with just some rules to plug in about data validation, business logic, etc. On the other hand, if your software projects involve more-difficult subject matter, you're going to find it struggles a lot more.
- bigstrat2003 2mo agoNo, it very much is not.