Post #1305400
2026-02-07 10:38 UTC
I've started using AI pretty heavily for writing code in languages I'm not as confident in (especially JS and SQL) after being skeptical for a while, as well as code which can be described briefly but is tedious to write, and I think the problem here is "by" - it would be better to say "with"
You don't say that 90% of code was written by code completion plugins, because it takes someone to pick the right thing from the list, check the docs to see it's right, etc.
It's the same for AI, I check the "thinking"/planning logs to make sure the logic is right, and sometimes it is, sometimes it isn't, at which point you can write a brief psudocode brief of what you want to do, sometimes it starts on the right path then goes off, at which point you can say "no, go back to this point" and generally it works well.
I'd say this kind of code is maybe 30-50% of what I write, the other 50-70% being more technically complex and in a language I'm more experienced in, so I can't fully believe the 30% figure when you're going to be having some people wasting time by not using it when they could use it for speedup, and others using it too much and wasting time trying to implement more complex things than it's capable of - this one irks me especially after having to spend 3½ hours yesterday reviewing a new hire's MR that they could've spent actually learning the libraries, or I could've spent implementing the whole ticket with some time left over to teach them.
Replies (2)
-
@TonyTonyChopper@mander.xyz 2026-02-07 14:15
Large language models can't think. The "thinking" it spits out to explain the other text it spits out is pure bullshit.
-
@zurchpet@lemmy.ml 2026-02-07 11:43
I like [this write up](https://xcancel.com/karpathy/status/2015883857489522876). It reflects my experience with AI assisted code generation.