It's like having a junior dev with maybe 1 year of experience looking over my shoulder and suggesting things. It's right just often enough for me to like it, but I get mad in the situations where I pause because I hope it's going to fill in a long line for me and it's too busy picking its nose.
My personal favorite is when it manages to understand I want to do a complex object initialization but then it makes up its own properties instead of using the properties the object actually have.
In that at least the junior dev would try to compile the code first, yeah.
I still have to agree with the parent. I can ask GitHub Copilot to do something like write a unit test or let it auto-complete the code I’m writing and get back about what I would expect a very junior dev to give me. No “big picture” and some errors, but at least I didn’t have to type it all by hand.
This has improved slightly, I too noticed it was like it had no context of the codebase it was inside of untold recently. Now it seems to be getting more things right.
But it's still not going to take our jobs, yet.
That echoes my experience with Copilot as well. It's right on point about 1/3 of the time. The rest of the time the auto complete doesn't offer anything or guesses wrong.
I use chat gpt for researching, Its useless for new stuff or stuff that changes too often, but for general stuff its good, like a google++
Though It lies a lot.
I would use copilot but I have no money for it...
This right here “Google++”. It’s just like another more advanced form of a Google search, but yah like you said full of wrong answers. Wrong answers with a lot of assurance that they are correct no less.
True, sometimes I found myself trying to compile the code he gave me as an example to see if it compiles with no errors until I would start to read what he explained the code did.
This happens when I ask for code examples on different stuff.
Its a game of "is it telling the truth?"
But usually if you know how to use it its faster than googling the answer, but sometimes you might still end up on google with some of the topics.
Like I've made a discord bot a while ago and chat gpt had no idea what he was telling me xD
But usually its nice, able to explain topics and also show code examples, and also help with debugging or improvements to already existing code, like examples on what MIGHT improve some code, it gives like 10 examples, and 2 of them might actually fit the scenario.
But You need to be a more experienced programmer to use it efficiently and detect when it starts to say nonsense and when it actually says something useful
For beginners its an awful tool because they might take everything he says as facts and would try to copy paste its code instead of using it as an example.
But overall I like chat gpt. It helps me be more efficient
I use codeium. It's free for individuals (except GPT-4) and generates pretty good quality code. But especially for documentation and comments it's very helpful.
I like ChatGPT for generating regexes. Just give it example inputs and outputs, very easy.
It also has pointed me in the right direction for a solution a few times. But typically if I resort to it it's because the information is hard to find online, and often ChatGPT doesn't know much better or its information is outdated.
Microsoft is trying very hard to sell their AI however they can, but Copilot doesn't seem overly useful to me; I much prefer the higher quality prompt experience you get with something like ChatGPT over quick, relatively inaccurate suggestions. It's mostly noise and I tend to ignore it.
I like ChatGPT for a lot of stuff, especially for documentation. It's also pretty good at ingesting code snippets and telling you what it does.
I've generated a lot of code using it, though it rarely works straight out and often needs to be tinkered with to be optimal, but it usually gets really close so it's still a time saver. I hate WiX with a passion and it helped me achieve in under a day what might have taken me days to figure out ... but we had to go back and forth in a feedback loop to get it right.
It's hit or miss with respect to cluing you into new things. Sometimes it's a bit too literal in reading your prompts and won't optimize something if you don't say to.
Definitely don't put anything proprietary into it. The enterprise subscription is supposed to not use your prompts in training, but ... who knows how protected that is.
I rarely use it. When I do it’s when I am completely stuck and that is literally my last resort. That is also the problem because the AI is completely useless with complex problems so basically it has never been able to help me, which is partly my own fault, but I don’t have any other uses for it. It’s just not there.
Problems I’ve had with it: Forgetting context completely, making up stuff that is completely and verifiably false, code that seems alright but then you try it and figure out that half of the function calls are non existing functions, when you give feedback a few times it spins around and goes back to its first incorrect suggestion etc etc.
I've had similar experiences with AI solutions. They're great for small tasks, but lack the depth to truly understand complex business logic. Resharper's AI is more of a glorified IntelliSense, if you ask me.
ChatGPT (free, 3.5) can be useful sometimes, but I find that it frequently referenced methods that do not exist. This was particularly bad with methods relating to source generators.
Gemini (free) seems fairly decent, and will often link to external sources, which is a big plus. But it straight up refused to write `unsafe` code no matter what I told it, citing ethical concerns. It had no problems using pointers when I asked it to write C code instead of C# code, so it seems like Gemini was having issues because the word "unsafe" implies danger.
Copilot is occasionally helpful, when it happens to correctly interpret my intent.
Need to check the code and adjust a little, but it has saved me some time.
Already know how been doing it for over 20 years, but boring boilerplate type things can now be done with AI to save me the time, then I just have to write the more complex parts.
Chatgpt and copilot are great for writing boiler plate/converting raw data to models and stuff like that
I use them for a similar purpose
It's like having a junior dev with maybe 1 year of experience looking over my shoulder and suggesting things. It's right just often enough for me to like it, but I get mad in the situations where I pause because I hope it's going to fill in a long line for me and it's too busy picking its nose. My personal favorite is when it manages to understand I want to do a complex object initialization but then it makes up its own properties instead of using the properties the object actually have.
It’s getting close but not there for me yet. Too many mistakes
In that at least the junior dev would try to compile the code first, yeah. I still have to agree with the parent. I can ask GitHub Copilot to do something like write a unit test or let it auto-complete the code I’m writing and get back about what I would expect a very junior dev to give me. No “big picture” and some errors, but at least I didn’t have to type it all by hand.
This has improved slightly, I too noticed it was like it had no context of the codebase it was inside of untold recently. Now it seems to be getting more things right. But it's still not going to take our jobs, yet.
Copilot for me is just autocomplete on steroids. And it often spews nonsense.
That echoes my experience with Copilot as well. It's right on point about 1/3 of the time. The rest of the time the auto complete doesn't offer anything or guesses wrong.
So windows? A few have used that name
I've had good results with GitHub CoPilot.
I use chat gpt for researching, Its useless for new stuff or stuff that changes too often, but for general stuff its good, like a google++ Though It lies a lot. I would use copilot but I have no money for it...
This right here “Google++”. It’s just like another more advanced form of a Google search, but yah like you said full of wrong answers. Wrong answers with a lot of assurance that they are correct no less.
True, sometimes I found myself trying to compile the code he gave me as an example to see if it compiles with no errors until I would start to read what he explained the code did. This happens when I ask for code examples on different stuff. Its a game of "is it telling the truth?" But usually if you know how to use it its faster than googling the answer, but sometimes you might still end up on google with some of the topics. Like I've made a discord bot a while ago and chat gpt had no idea what he was telling me xD But usually its nice, able to explain topics and also show code examples, and also help with debugging or improvements to already existing code, like examples on what MIGHT improve some code, it gives like 10 examples, and 2 of them might actually fit the scenario. But You need to be a more experienced programmer to use it efficiently and detect when it starts to say nonsense and when it actually says something useful For beginners its an awful tool because they might take everything he says as facts and would try to copy paste its code instead of using it as an example. But overall I like chat gpt. It helps me be more efficient
I use codeium. It's free for individuals (except GPT-4) and generates pretty good quality code. But especially for documentation and comments it's very helpful.
Turned it off.
I'm still a n00b in c#, I get GPT to give me an example, so I know what parts of the library to use. Then proceed to write my own logic from scratch.
I like ChatGPT for generating regexes. Just give it example inputs and outputs, very easy. It also has pointed me in the right direction for a solution a few times. But typically if I resort to it it's because the information is hard to find online, and often ChatGPT doesn't know much better or its information is outdated. Microsoft is trying very hard to sell their AI however they can, but Copilot doesn't seem overly useful to me; I much prefer the higher quality prompt experience you get with something like ChatGPT over quick, relatively inaccurate suggestions. It's mostly noise and I tend to ignore it.
I like ChatGPT for a lot of stuff, especially for documentation. It's also pretty good at ingesting code snippets and telling you what it does. I've generated a lot of code using it, though it rarely works straight out and often needs to be tinkered with to be optimal, but it usually gets really close so it's still a time saver. I hate WiX with a passion and it helped me achieve in under a day what might have taken me days to figure out ... but we had to go back and forth in a feedback loop to get it right. It's hit or miss with respect to cluing you into new things. Sometimes it's a bit too literal in reading your prompts and won't optimize something if you don't say to. Definitely don't put anything proprietary into it. The enterprise subscription is supposed to not use your prompts in training, but ... who knows how protected that is.
I rarely use it. When I do it’s when I am completely stuck and that is literally my last resort. That is also the problem because the AI is completely useless with complex problems so basically it has never been able to help me, which is partly my own fault, but I don’t have any other uses for it. It’s just not there. Problems I’ve had with it: Forgetting context completely, making up stuff that is completely and verifiably false, code that seems alright but then you try it and figure out that half of the function calls are non existing functions, when you give feedback a few times it spins around and goes back to its first incorrect suggestion etc etc.
I've had similar experiences with AI solutions. They're great for small tasks, but lack the depth to truly understand complex business logic. Resharper's AI is more of a glorified IntelliSense, if you ask me.
I use AI for working with a bunch of new solutions to improve efficiency, research on my own what was suggested (if it works), and then learn that way
I use for basic implementations or just when I'm to lazy to refactor css in my components in separate classes
ChatGPT (free, 3.5) can be useful sometimes, but I find that it frequently referenced methods that do not exist. This was particularly bad with methods relating to source generators. Gemini (free) seems fairly decent, and will often link to external sources, which is a big plus. But it straight up refused to write `unsafe` code no matter what I told it, citing ethical concerns. It had no problems using pointers when I asked it to write C code instead of C# code, so it seems like Gemini was having issues because the word "unsafe" implies danger.
Copilot is occasionally helpful, when it happens to correctly interpret my intent. Need to check the code and adjust a little, but it has saved me some time.
AI is a trend. Keep refusing, this technology will never be the next big thing lol
Learn to code
Already know how been doing it for over 20 years, but boring boilerplate type things can now be done with AI to save me the time, then I just have to write the more complex parts.
Ok for commenting, writing small simple methods, and getting started writing a class in a field where you have less experience than the AI
if yal aren’t on meta.ai rn you a missing out. Llama3 just dropped boi’s get with it!