I haven't seen any evidence yet that using AI is improving developer performance, just a bunch of people who "feel" like it does.

I'm still on the fence about codegen but it's certainly helping explain code quickly without manually step through and providing quick access to docs

I've built a SaaS (with paying customers) in a month that would have taken me easily 6 months to build with this level of quality and features. AI wrote I'd say 99.9% of code. Without AI I wouldn't even have done this because it would have been too large of a task.

In addition, for my old product which is 5+ years old, AI now writes 95%+ of code for me. Now the programming itself takes a small percentage of my time, freeing me time for other tasks.

No-one serious is claiming 6x productivity improvements for close to equal quality

This is proving GP's point that you're going off feels and/or exaggerating

Quality is better both from a user and a code perspective.

From a user perspective I often implement a feature and then just throw it away no worries because I can reimplement it in an hour again based on my findings. No sunken cost. Also I can implement very small details that otherwise I'd have to backlog. This leads to a higher quality product for the user.

From a code standpoint I frequently do large refactors that also would never have been worth it by hand. I have a level of test coverage that would be infeasible for a one man show.

> I have a level of test coverage that would be infeasible for a one man show.

When a metric becomes a target, it ceases to be a good metric.

Cool. What's the product? Like, do you have a link to it or something.

It's boring glorified CRUD for SMBs of a certain industry focused on compliance and workflows specific to my country. Think your typical inventory, ticketing, CRM + industry specific features.

Boring stuff from a programming standpoint but stuff that helps businesses so they pay for it.

Okay, but where's the product? You described the product, but didn't share it.