[wredue]

https://resources.uplevelteam.com/gen-ai-for-coding

Efficiency does not go up. In fact, the users claims that they are more productive do not stand up to scrutiny.

Code quality decreases.

This is why I don’t just believe what people say. It makes no sense to me that something I am observing is sneaking in little bugs on nearly every suggestion somehow saves time.

It logically cannot be true that reading output code to make sure it is doing what you want is significantly faster than just writing what’s in your head.

Then it is supposedly good for boilerplate, but like, code templates have existed forever. There’s been tools with prescriptive, deterministic output that handle boilerplate for you for ages. So again here, it makes literally zero sense that a non-deterministic output is actually handling boilerplate better than just setting your env up properly.

[aspenmayer]

I would have to look more into their methodology, but it’s fair to say that the AI coding tools are so new that workflows using them are still being themselves standardized. Interaction models are being prototyped.

I’m willing to believe that those posting on HN about their experiences with AI coding tools are doing so in good faith and also are probably able to evaluate their own experiences faithfully. They aren’t gaslighting themselves, as most folks using them for work are assumed to be doing useful work with them over baseline of not using the AI coding tools, or they wouldn’t use them.

Good enough works. By that same token, those who are not having better than baseline experiences with AI coding tools are probably “holding it wrong”/using the tools in a manner that they are ill-suited for etc. Those devs are probably not able to assess their own performance as well as those who are more proficient at coding generally, even without using AI coding tools.

Basically, good programmers are better able to use programming tools, even AI coding tools that are somewhat buggy in their implementations and/or output. Using the wrong tool for the job or using the right tool improperly is not an indictment of the tool, but of the user.

A poor craftsperson blames their tools. A quality craftsperson accepts their tools for what they are and aren’t, and adapts their tools and adapts to their tools accordingly.

[wredue]

Yeah sorry but no. This is definitely a case of “you’re holding your phone wrong” in your comment.

The tools in this case is consistently giving wrong results and measurably not living up to claimed efficiency. This is literally your business paying Microsoft to reduce efficiency and output a worse product than had you not done that.

Maybe AI will be there some day, but as of right now, using deterministic tooling is still unquestionably the king of productivity helping.