But in all seriousness it depends on what you’re doing with it. Writing a quick tool using an LLM is much easier than context changing to write it yourself. If you need the tool, that’s very valuable.
Been building a new app with lots of policies and whatnot and instructing a LLM is just much faster than doing the same repetitive shit over and over myself.
A little update: upon viewing the page on phone, for me the "comitter" field in the demo is going out of bounds... Really not speaking for their product.
The recommended tool cant even produce mobile friendly, like why would I ever use it?
With LLM driven code you can generate code once, and then if anything is shitty about it you can always manually update it yourself without the need of an LLM. It's a dependency of convenience, not an app-dependency.
https://jsonforms.io/img/architecture.svg
You can add your custom renderer but you still need their library for bindings and such.
Right, so depending on an LLM makes perfect sense in that case, thanks for clarifying :)
That said most of the world's most useful code has strict quality requirements. Even before AI 90% of SLOC would be tossed away without much if any use, 9% was used infrequently while 1% runs half the world's software.
Reviewers aren't perfect, far from it. And we just gave them ~20x more code to review. Incentives mean that taking 20x longer to review is unacceptable. So where do we go from here?
Before: One person writes the code (and likely understands it thoroughly), another person reviews the code to spot obvious mistakes or shortcomings. Now: AI writes the code, a person reviews it to spot obvious mistakes or shortcomings.
In the before case, you have a person who has a deeper understanding of the code and in the AI case, you don’t, instead you have even more code to review.
When a competent programmer is writing the code, the human written code tends to be higher quality too. So it’s not just about review quantity but the quality of code being reviewed. Some people claim the AI writes great code, but that just hasn’t been my experience yet (at least with the models I’ve tried, including Opus). They still make ridiculously bad decisions regularly.
This is a great idea, but on average is deeply untrue. Far and away most programmers today write significantly worse code than LLMs. Also LLMs are fantastic at generating high level summaries and comments in code
Your experience with LLMs do not match my own. Not to say that I haven’t experienced terrible human written code where I’ve wondered what the author could possibly have been thinking, but overall, I still find LLM written code to be on the poor side.
Like, the code itself is ok, but the wider picture reasoning and abstractions are bad. It also makes really dumb decisions far too often. Or doggedly shoehorns its first idea in no matter how badly it fits.