Its not about how concise or short your code looks, its how about much time the new intern coming tomorrow needs to understand those 1000 line files. I find the syntax very hard to remember and confusing
Like this example: https://civet.dev/#everything-is-an-expression `items = for item of items`, in js you type `for`and copilot wrote nearly the full correct for-code. So you have to type not much and can read it easy.
(Terse Perl may be delightful to write, as long as you still remember exactly what you wrote and why. But not after that.)
Copilot is good when working with something where the idiomatic patterns are common, widespread, and hard to screw up. Civet has low adoption, uses much looser syntax (bracing, whitespace), and lacks the rigor of common TypeScript code.
``` const result = items.map( i => i.length ? i.toUpperCase() : ‘<empty>’) ```
I think things get interesting here when different kinds of iterators come into play (eg generators, async-await for loops, non-array iterables). Shame the landing page doesn’t touch on that at all.
foro
for ($1 of $2) {
$0
}
touc
toUpperCase()
le
length
map
map(x => $0)
Seriously, typing code is some '90s activity since forever. Using copilot for this is akin to hitting a nail with a microscope.
> Some people don't code for the interns but to have fun.
I don't think the person you were replying to necessarily disagrees with you there. But their post was phrased in such a way that seemed like business was the only focus that mattered, yeah.
I hope so.
> it's mostly logical extensions of the javascript syntax which are easy to understand if you know javascript.
They didn't look thatneasy to understand to me, and a lot of other people judging by the comments.
i see it as moving physical abstraction into mental abstraction
save few lines of code but costs more mental ram