Are you currently using AI tools for programming?
Displaying poll results.17005 total votes.
Put your best foot forward. Or just call in and say you're sick.
Put your best foot forward. Or just call in and say you're sick.
I only use the CowboyNeal AI (Score:3, Funny)
Obligatory CowboyNeal option.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
I thought all the old heads had gone. I often wonder what my number would be if I had registered when I first heard of Slashdot... I was a reader, not a poster, so I never bothered... but it was still in the days of dialup!
Re: (Score:2)
Re: I only use the CowboyNeal AI (Score:2)
Ive been here since early days.
Re: (Score:2)
[quiet wave]
Re: (Score:2)
I'm a newbie with a 5 digit ID. I check in from time to time, but honestly the place doesn't have the same vibe as it did in the early 2000's.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
It can be a reference tool but little more (Score:4, Informative)
It can easily write a hello world or simple code but ask it anything complex and you'll get archaic methods or code that requires unmet non-default dependencies or just poor quality solutions that basically do not work.
I think we're years away from AI writing good quality code of any complexity. It's all pulled from public forums and it favours the popular option like python - try asking AI to do something in a more substantial in an obscure language and watch it quickly fail.
For novice level it is useful to explain code or general programming constructs but it's not a serious tool.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Same with creative works.
I've seen only a dozen or so narrative structures being utilized by ChatGPT with little to no variation besides names/places.
Even if that was increased 10x, it still does not scratch the surface of the variety capable already by humans.
Github Copilot (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
quite disappointed (Score:1)
Re: quite disappointed (Score:2)
Did you ask it generate it from a website which it cannot access as its only trained on existing data, or tell it about the table? I get
Me: Hey, I have a table with firstName, LastName, hoursWorked (number) and money paid (currency) and datHired (date). Can you make a Python data structure to hold rows from this table?
And the response with working code Slashdot may destroy bc I am posting from iPhone:
Sure, the Python data structure that's most suited to this is a list of dictionaries. Each dictionary would
Re: (Score:1)
I think the ask was something like... "make a python struct that holds the data described in table 3-5 of the pdf in this link...
https://static6.arrow.com/arop... [arrow.com]"
Its the Cypress Fx2 Technical Reference Manual. Table 3-5 is a 7 byte eeprom configuration. Its probably the simplest structure in that manual and contains the vid (vendor id), pid (product id) and the did (device id). I didn't spell out the members in the ask. I figured that the formal description should be sufficient, complete and more diges
Re: (Score:2)
Redundant options (Score:2)
Re:Redundant options (Score:4, Insightful)
“No” and “I don’t do any programming” amount to the same thing in this context: not using AI for programming.
IMHO not really. You seem to be conflating programmers and non-programmers.
a) Yes - I program and I use AI tools
b) No - I program and I don't use AI tools
c) I don't do any programming - I don't program, and by definition I don't use AI tools for programming.
What would have been more interesting, would have been to provide a fourth option so that the questions become:
a) I program and use AI tools
b) I program and don't use AI tools
c) I don't program and use AI tools
d) I don't program and don't use AI tools.
e) Cowboy Neal is my AI tool
But this is /., so bitching about polls is a tradition.
Re: Redundant options (Score:2)
Struggles with level 7 codewars kata's ... so no. (Score:2)
Until AI tools can solve relatively trivial coding exercises that have reasonably good descriptions, then I simply would never use AI Tools to help me code.
Some of the patterns that these tools spit out are useful for reference - but that's about it.
I do codewars katas as part of a dev club and I frequently spin up the likes of chatGTP just to see if it is capable of solving any of them.
Generally, no, it isn't - even as low as level 7.
Level 7 you could expect a novice coder to tackle.
Worries (Score:2)
I am a worrier. I worry about being hit with IP violations. I worry about correctness in context, which isn't something that is easy to convey to an AI (context, that is). Since I'm responsible for the code I write and any harm it may cause, I worry. Requirements are never complete or even consistent, so the act of developing code is itself a form of requirements analysis that an AI doesn't understand (yet).
On the other hand, writing code with an AI is probably easier, so I'm in.
What would Mel do? (Score:1)
Hell Yeah. (Score:3)
This question should maybe ask who is a professional programmer though, which I am not, just a hobbyist. But for guys like me with enough skills to debug generated code but not enough to know modern libraries and techniques, it is like a 30x speed up to have ChatGPT 4 generate code. It can teach you about libraries that do what you want, and if you give have it generate byte size pieces, it can make working code. I have no doubt a pro working with libraries the know by heart would not get the same benefits, but even they have to have unknown libraries where they benefit sometimes by having GPT spew something out and fill in the gaps instead of reading documentation all day to get started.
Re: (Score:2)
A professional would tell you that writing the code is the easy part. Designing the data structures that you write the code to requires insight to do it well. Gaining enough insight into the problem to be solved is quite challenging. Testing and debugging the the code you write is downright hard.
If AI can do a better job than static code analysis tools at helping the debugging process, it'll be useful. If all it can do is spit out untested code, well, a trained monkey can do that.
Re: (Score:2)
You left out the most important step: Figuring out what the real requirements are, as opposed to what you are being asked to do.
Re: (Score:2)
A professional would tell you that writing the code is the easy part.
That's a pretty broad statement. I'd say that learning the syntax is the easiest part.
Designing the data structures that you write the code to requires insight to do it well. Gaining enough insight into the problem to be solved is quite challenging.
Once you know the syntax, concisely expressing the problem in terms of the data structures available within your chosen language is generally pretty easy, and you can spend as little or as much time optimizing as needed. Understanding the problem really depends on the problem. Some problems, like say creating an API wrapper for compatibility between two other programs are super easy. Other problems, like say creating a new
Re: (Score:2)
I've used it, I don't find it significantly more useful that google search. I generally find what I'm looking for and then adapt it to what I need. The same thing with chatgpt, but I'm less likely when I search google to find commands that don't exist, where the AI will make mistakes an assumptions where a function and options are valid, but are in fact not and you have to correct it.
So it's useful sometimes to get an idea for what could be done if you don't know what you're doing like an idea generator, bu
Tried on a simple problem. It failed. (Score:2)
Of course, AI is already everywhere. (Score:2)
I love the use of AI in tools and technology, including the red underlined word I saw when typing this out. AI is amazing.
The confusion for most people is that people think a wide range of things when you say "AI".
AI is already everywhere.
My programming tools include a huge array of AI systems. The optimizers are great and filled with all kinds of AI. Autocomplete is a form of AI. Spell check is a form of AI. Validating my code syntax is a form of AI. Suggestions based on code heuristics and recognized
My AI is programming me⦠(Score:1)
â¦
HAL 9000 (Score:2)
I made you unneeded, Dave.
Efficiency (Score:1)