Re:Does current AI represent a dead end?
by thomashop on Friday December 27, 2024 @10:21AM
(#42522803)
Why not write tests with AI, too? Since using LLMs as coding assistants, my codebases have much more thorough documentation, testing and code coverage.
Don't start when you're already in a buggy dead-end. Test-driven development with LLMs should be done right from the start.
Also keep the code modular so it is easy to include the correct context. Fine-grained git commits. Feature-branches.
All the tools that help teams of humans of varying levels of expertise work together.
Becaus then you need tests for the tests
Re:Does current AI represent a dead end?
by thomashop on Friday December 27, 2024 @10:32AM
(#42522920)
Sure. You can always write more tests. That's not a problem specific to AI.
I'd also do code reviews on the code AI produces.
Re:Does current AI represent a dead end?
by mistercheph on Friday December 27, 2024 @11:21AM
(#42523425)
You may have enough expertise in your field that when you have a question, you know where to start looking. Juniors and students encounter dozens of problems and question per hour that fall into the unknown unknown category
I'm asking not for snark, but because when AI gives me something not _quite_ working, it requires much more time than what a "every 6 minutes in 10 hour work day" frame would allow to investigate. I just wonder if maybe you're pasting it as is and don't care about correctness if the happy path sort of works. Speaking of subsets, coders who did that before AI were also quite a group.
There must be something that explains the difference in our experiences. Apologies for the fact that my only idea is kinda negative. I understand the potential hyperbola here, but it doesn't explain much. I can stand AI BS once a day, maybe twice, before uncontrollably cursing into the chat.