Except maybe that it is still not generally available.
Except maybe that it is still not generally available.
Copilot is decent at speeding up some commonly occurring boilerplate in a common language, and pretty bad at anything else.
FWIW, there was also this https://challenge.openai.com/codex/leaderboard, and Copilot's 'time' was laughably bad compared to any decent human.
Does this mean that it couldn't potentially be a useful tool? No. I think it could be, and for some projects I would probably use it myself to speed up some laborious tasks. But currently, claiming it can help with anything remotely more complex is just untrue.
If you have evidence to the contrary, I'd like to see it.
edit.
- ok so you conceded in your sentence that it's faster and you would use it for that reason.
so your only disagreement is it can't help you solve harder problems?.
- the average dev is hitting stackoverflow 10x a day for that very reason. And that data is embedded in copilot. I've literally typed the name of functions I was going to have to spend 20 minutes googling to figure out how to achieve. typed the pseudo code comments and boom. copilot has done it before I even had to think. If not I just have to change how i prompt it by feeding it a few variable names or changing my comments. As I said. You can get good at using it. If copilot is crap it's because of the person using it. I.e. if you are looking for a bike and you google 'chicken sandwich' well. You aint gonna get a bike.
To me 'smarter and faster' means being able to solve harder problems + accurately reason about things, etc. (And not introduce security issues, which is a whole other thing...)
If it is just a replacement for stackoverflow, it's probably useful and it could save time, but I'm not sure it's 'smarter and faster' any more than any other feature in an IDE (you could also create a hotkey or something to search SO which would probably be just as fast too).
It's nice to reason about your actual problem and not the features of code.