I think it’ll be better because Copilot is pretty good for typing and this builds upon that framework
The problems are more than how to express.
You have to read code and debug it that is inevitable, you can't say that there will not be any bugs if you use voice instead of writing.
The big difference is that Copilot generates real, functioning code based off past implementations of real, functioning code. A no-code tool like Webflow is an entirely different product all together. The ML transformers powering Copilot are the secret sauce here, that technology just literally did not exist when Java and UML were all the rage.
I'd encourage anyone who hasn't tried it to give Copilot a try. There really has never been anything like it in my memory, and while I totally agree there have been dozens of efforts to allow non-technical people to generate code, I think Copilot may be on to something very special.
Re:GitHub is planning Voice to Code
by candiddevmike on Thursday November 10, 2022 @09:35AM
(#33547026)
Copying functions and composing them into apps are two completely different things.
As a more simple problem space, building programs from UML charts was one of Java's promise, and it failed miserably, not because the technology was lacking, but because it's just a damn hard problem.
As of now ee have nothing approaching "non technical people to be able to instantly create things" if the "things" you want are useful in any way.