this post was submitted on 22 Oct 2024
228 points (86.5% liked)

Technology

59377 readers
2900 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] TimeSquirrel@kbin.melroy.org 147 points 3 weeks ago (5 children)

Try programming for a day without syntax highlighting or auto-completion, and experience how pathetic you feel without them. If you're like me, you'll discover that those "assistants" have sapped much of your knowledge by eliminating the need to memorize even embarrassingly simple tasks.

That's...how the world works. We move on. We aren't programming computers by flipping toggle switches or moving patch cables around anymore either.

'Try directly hand-coding bits into regions of memory without a compiler/linker and experience how pathetic you feel without it.'

[–] Anti_Iridium@lemmy.world 39 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Naw man, the other day I pulled a moth out of my code.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Sinuousity@lemmy.world 36 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (1 children)

What a dumb take (in your quote). Autocompletion showing me all the members of an object is nothing like ChatGPT hallucinating members that don't exist. Autocomplete will show you members you haven't seen, or aren't even documented.

Not to mention they said syntax highlighting is a bad thing... Why use computers at all? Go back to the golden days of punchcards

[–] Daedskin@lemm.ee 15 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

From later in the article (emphasis author's)

Earlier in this article I intimated that many of us are already dependent on our fancy development environments—syntax highlighting, auto-completion, code analysis, automatic refactoring. You might be wondering how AI differs from those. The answer is pretty easy: The former are tools with the ultimate goal of helping you to be more efficient and write better code; the latter is a tool with the ultimate goal of completely replacing you.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] tdawg@lemmy.world 11 points 3 weeks ago

Without syntax highlighting?? Sorry I guess my pretty colors are a weakness. Some people just want to be curmudgeons

[–] uis@lemm.ee 6 points 3 weeks ago

'Try directly hand-coding bits into regions of memory without a compiler/linker and experience how pathetic you feel without it.'

There was article about programming atmega with pulling electrodes in and out of salty water.

[–] hendrik@palaver.p3x.de 66 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (1 children)

Our computer science professor in some programming course at university told us we were not supposed to take advice from the internet or answers from Stack Overflow for half a year... Until we learned the ropes. And could asses for ourselves what's right and what is wrong. (And I believe that was some C/C++ course where you get lots of opportunuties to do silly things that might somehow work but for all of the wrong reasons.)

I think he was right. There is lots of misinformation out there that isn't a proper design pattern. And with copy-pasting stuff, you don't necessarily learn anything. Whereas learning with some method is efficient and works.

And I'm pretty sure I'm not super intelligent, but all of that isn't really hard. I mean if someone codes regularly, they might as well learn how to do it properly. It takes a bit of time initially... But you get that time back later on. Though... I'd let AI write some boilerplate code. Or design a website if I'm not interested at all how the HTML and CSS works... I think that's alright to do.

[–] AceBonobo@lemmy.world 53 points 3 weeks ago (3 children)

The real learning comes from debugging the garbage code you copied from stack overflow

[–] hendrik@palaver.p3x.de 22 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

I mean it also contains great stuff. Niche workarounds, ways to do something more efficiently than some standard library function does.

You just need a means of telling apart the good and the bad. Because there's also people smashing their forehead on the keyboard until it happens to be something that compiles. And people repeating urban legends and outdated info. You somehow need background knowledge to tell which is which. AI didn't invent phrasing some nonesense with full conviction. It is very good at doing exactly that, but we humans also have been doing that since the beginning of time.

[–] peopleproblems@lemmy.world 8 points 3 weeks ago

Debugging and being able to interpret documentation when it exists.

But good lord, the amount of programmers I work with that never use an IDE debugger is unreal. I get that you don't have to, but Jesus Christ, if yout not getting an expected result, it's way fucking faster to step through the code and see where the data changes then to slap logging into every line and attempt to read the output.

[–] wewbull@feddit.uk 7 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Debugging only teaches logic. Not structure. No amount cut, paste, debug with teach you the factory pattern.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] r00ty@kbin.life 47 points 3 weeks ago

I've never had AI create working code anyway.

But it will generally point me in the right direction. It's useful for:

  1. Helping get your train of thought back in the right direction
  2. Automating what would be a lot of boilerplate/repetitive coding. Just beware you will still need to check it over.

You need to be skilled to spot the mistakes it will definitely make.

[–] Kolanaki@yiffit.net 43 points 3 weeks ago

I can be a bad programmer without using AI generated code. 😤

[–] Nomecks@lemmy.ca 32 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (2 children)

Good. There's a lot of non-programmers who are now bad ones and are using AI to make their ideas real. It's made programming way more accessible to people who would never learn before.

[–] Sabata11792@ani.social 18 points 3 weeks ago (5 children)

I got back into programming because I can ask an Ai my stupid questions I'm too dumb to google correctly. I haven't otherwise wrote code since college and kinda revived a long dead hobby. It removes a barrier to entry that I otherwise gave up on. Been working on a project to teach myself python the last few months, with Ai replacing the roll of google for the most part.

Copy-pasting Ai code still blows up in your face just as much as code you stole from stack overflow...

[–] LucidNightmare@lemm.ee 11 points 3 weeks ago

I wouldn't say you're dumb when it comes to Google. Their search is just a broken mess of dog shit now.

[–] uis@lemm.ee 5 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

Copy-pasting Ai code still blows up in your face just as much as code you stole from stack overflow...

Show me difference:

They are the same.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] chakan2@lemmy.world 5 points 3 weeks ago

No...stack I can usually figure out from the context of questions what went wrong. AI will very confidently and eloquently give you a very subtle bullshit answer.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] raker@lemmy.world 5 points 3 weeks ago

Can confirm. Using AI for coding for a couple of months now. There sure is a lot of copy and paste, trail and error, but without the assistance I would not have been able to enhance and customize code like that. Now I am some steps further and was even able to question the AI output, correct it, made it better. I am getting there: learning, optimizing, creating new stuff. It is fun. And when I compile the code, it runs. If not, I debug. Unthinkable for me a year ago.

[–] TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world 24 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (1 children)

You mean I can go from being a terrible programmer to merely a bad one? I'm in.

[–] catloaf@lemm.ee 12 points 3 weeks ago

Unironically, yes. It'll generally generate working code, but not necessarily the most correct or efficient. And it may not do exactly what you want.

[–] normalexit@lemmy.world 21 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

I've been writing code professionally for nearly two decades, and I love having copilot available in my IDE. When there is some boilerplate or a SQL query I just don't want to write, it'll oftentimes get me started with something reasonable that is wrong in a couple of subtle ways. I then fix it, laugh at how wrong it was, or use part of the proposed answer in my project.

If you're a non-corder, sure it is pure danger, but if you know what you're doing it can give you a little boost. Only time will tell if it makes me rusty on some basics, but it is another tool in the toolbox now.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] mindaika@lemmy.dbzer0.com 20 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

I don’t love AI, but programming is engineering. The goal is to solve a problem, not to be the best at solving a problem.

Also I can write shitty code without help anyway

[–] kiwifoxtrot@lemmy.world 13 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

The issue with engineering is that if you don't solve it efficiently and correctly enough, it'll blow up later.

[–] mindaika@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (4 children)

Sounds like a problem for later

Flippancy aside: the fundamental rule in all engineering is solving the problem you have, not the problem you might have later

[–] Croquette@sh.itjust.works 6 points 3 weeks ago

It's rarely the case. You rarely work in vacuum where your work only affects what you do at the moment. There is always a downstream or upstream dependency/requirement that needs to be met that you have to take into account in your development.

You have to avoid the problem that might come later that you are aware of. If it's not possible, you have to mitigate the impact of the future problems.

It's not possible to know of all the problems that might/will happen, but with a little work before a project, a lot of issues can be avoided/mitigated.

I wouldn't want civil engineers thinking like that, because our infrastructure would be a lot worse than it is today.

[–] kiwifoxtrot@lemmy.world 4 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

That doesn't apply to all engineering. In ChE, it'll literally blow up later...

[–] mindaika@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

“Not blowing up later” would be part of the problem being solved

Engineering for future requirements almost always turn out to be a net loss. You don’t build a distillation column to process 8000T of benzene if you only need to process 40T

[–] reksas@sopuli.xyz 3 points 3 weeks ago

but you could design it to be easily scalable instead of having to build another even more expensive thing when you suddenly need to process 41T

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] random_character_a@lemmy.world 19 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

Not a coder. I can understand most python code and powershell scripts that others have done, but I don't remember syntax, if I need to make something from scratch. Doing that involves ton of googling and reading awful documentation that still leaves some things out. I do this maybe twice a year.

For someone like me AI coding is a god sent.

[–] peopleproblems@lemmy.world 12 points 3 weeks ago

doing that involves a ton of googling and reading awful documentation

Yes. That is programming.

To most of us, the syntax is the easy part to remember, and our IDEs take care of most of it. Being able to bang our heads through the documentation and experiment with libraries is pretty much what our jobs are.

AI coding is basically a shortcut to some of the stuff we have to repeat with slight changes in our software. It's also useful for setting up more complex code that we know we'll have to tweak.

Expecting it to produce something with the desired results is a recipe for disaster. It's basically a cheaper outsourcing method that can't actually compile and run it's code before giving it to you.

[–] Dot@feddit.org 5 points 3 weeks ago

If you're someone who has no actual interest in learning to code, and instead see AI as more of a freelancer—telling it stuff like "make a kart racer game," and "that sucks, make it better"—then none of this really applies to you.

[–] tias@discuss.tchncs.de 17 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (3 children)

I'll confess I only skimmed the article, but it seems like just a bunch of unsubstantiated opinions and I don't buy it.

Using AI generated code is like pair programming with a junior programmer. You tell the junior what to do and then you correct their mistakes by telling them how to do better. In my experience, explaining things to someone else makes you better at your craft. Typically this cycle includes me changing the code manually at the end, and then possibly feeding it back to ChatGPT for another cycle of changes.

Apart from letting me realize and test my ideas quicker, this allows me to raise the abstraction level of my thinking. I can spend more time on architecture and on seeing the bigger picture, and less time being blinded by the nitty gritty details. I would say it makes me both a faster and a better programmer.

[–] ourob@discuss.tchncs.de 9 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

I’ve seen the comparison to pair programming with a junior programmer before, and it’s wild to me that such a comparison would be a point in favor of using AI for improving productivity.

I have never experienced a productivity boost by pairing with a junior. Which isn’t to say it’s not worth doing, but the productivity gains go entirely to the junior. The benefits I receive are mainly improving my communication and mentoring skills in the short term, and improving the team’s productivity in the long term by boosting the junior’s knowledge.

And it’s not like the AI works on the mundane stuff in parallel while I work on the more interesting, higher level stuff. I have to hold its hand through the process.

I feel like the efficiency gains of AI programming is almost entirely in improving your speed at wrestling a chatbot into producing something useful. Which may not be entirely useless going forward - knowing how to search well is an important skill, this may become something similar, but it just doesn’t seem worth the hassle to me.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Im_old@lemmy.world 15 points 3 weeks ago (3 children)

Well I'm already a bad programmer, at least I save time /j

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] uis@lemm.ee 13 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

I was saying AI for coding is bad until saw two pictures:

[–] dch82@lemmy.zip 6 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] 9point6@lemmy.world 13 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

Agree on the application side, but when it comes to the test suite, I'm definitely gonna consider letting an AI get that file started and then I'll run through, make sure the assertions are all what I would expect and refactor anything that needs it.

I've written countless tests in my career and I'm still gonna write countless more, but I'm glad I can at least spend less time on laborious repetition now and more time on the part of the job I actually enjoy which is actually solving problems.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] WalnutLum@lemmy.ml 9 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

If you treat an AI like anything other than the rubber duck in Rubber Duck Programming you're using it wrong.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] TORFdot0@lemmy.world 9 points 3 weeks ago

I don’t have an encyclopedic knowledge of every random library or built-in function of every language on earth so what’s the difference between googling for an example on stack overflow or asking an LLM?

If you are asking ChatGPT for every single piece of code it will be terrible because it just hallucinates libraries or misunderstands the prompt. But saying any kind of use makes you a bad programmer seems more like fud than actual concern

[–] vane@lemmy.world 7 points 3 weeks ago

Not using AI Generated Code won't make you programmer at all. It's just another way to start a journey to alcoholism and loneliness in front of computer screen. The only difference is that this time you travel with junior developer for poor people.

[–] JackbyDev@programming.dev 4 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

I asked ChatGPT to give me a script to parse my history file and output the dates in something human readable. Later I learned you can use something like history -i. It was basically instantaneous while the script was slow.

Though, I'm questioning my memory of this because I don't see that flag on man pages online.

Edit: In ChatGPT's defense, this was actually something oh my zsh added, not zsh.

[–] chakan2@lemmy.world 3 points 3 weeks ago

What's really ugly is it makes really good code with fucking terrible bugs. My last job for all of six weeks was trying to fix and integrations wrapper of an integrations wrapper on a 3rd party library of integrations.

It looked like really good code, but the architecture was fucked beyond repair. I was supposed to support it for a fortune 50. I quit before they could put me in the on call rotation.

load more comments
view more: next ›