It’s just a greater level of abstraction. First we talked to the computers on their own terms with punch cards.
Then Assembly came along to simplify the process, allowing humans to write readable code while compiling into Machine Code so the computers can run it.
Then we used higher-level languages like C to create the Assembly Code required.
Then we created languages like Python, that were even more human-readable, doing a lot more of the heavy lifting than C.
I understand the concern, but it’s just the latest step in a process that has been playing out since programming became a thing. At every step we give up some control, for the benefit of making our jobs easier.
I disagree. Even high level languages will consistently produce the same results. There may be low level differences depending on the compiler and the system’s architecture but if those are consistent you will get the same results.
AI coding isn’t an extremely human readable higher level programming language. Using an LLM to generate code adds a literal black box and the interpretation of the user and LLM’s human language (which humans can’t even do consistently) to the equation.
That’s fair, but I’m not arguing that it’s a higher-level language. I was trying to illustrate that it’s just to help people code more easily - as all of the other steps were.
If you asked ten programmers to turn a given set of instructions into code, you’d end up with ten different blocks of code. That’s the nature of turning English into code.
The difference is that this is a tool that does it, not a person. You write things in English, it produces code.
FWIW, I enjoy using a hex-editor to tinker around with Super Famicom ROMs in my free time - I’m certainly not anti-coding. As OP said, though, AI is now pretty good at generating working code - it’s daft not to use it as a tool.
I don’t think it’s at the point where it helps people code more easily, but maybe I’m just exclusively experiencing edge cases and turning to it for the wrong uses. I’ve only had failures. Hallucinations that waste my time, and flawed algorithms.
My favorite was a few weeks ago when I was having a rough day and needed a complicated algorithm to make a decision based on an inputted date. I told it that if I plug in value A to its algorithm, the answer is wrong. It went step by step explaining its "reasoning"and it returned the correct answer and then at the pivotal step it plugged in a different year than was in A, for just that step, and then proceeded to confirm to itself that if you plug in A, you get the right answer.
Maybe someday it will help, or maybe some problems it is useful for, I’ve just never had that experience.
It’s just a greater level of abstraction. First we talked to the computers on their own terms with punch cards.
Then Assembly came along to simplify the process, allowing humans to write readable code while compiling into Machine Code so the computers can run it.
Then we used higher-level languages like C to create the Assembly Code required.
Then we created languages like Python, that were even more human-readable, doing a lot more of the heavy lifting than C.
I understand the concern, but it’s just the latest step in a process that has been playing out since programming became a thing. At every step we give up some control, for the benefit of making our jobs easier.
I disagree. Even high level languages will consistently produce the same results. There may be low level differences depending on the compiler and the system’s architecture but if those are consistent you will get the same results.
AI coding isn’t an extremely human readable higher level programming language. Using an LLM to generate code adds a literal black box and the interpretation of the user and LLM’s human language (which humans can’t even do consistently) to the equation.
That’s fair, but I’m not arguing that it’s a higher-level language. I was trying to illustrate that it’s just to help people code more easily - as all of the other steps were.
If you asked ten programmers to turn a given set of instructions into code, you’d end up with ten different blocks of code. That’s the nature of turning English into code.
The difference is that this is a tool that does it, not a person. You write things in English, it produces code.
FWIW, I enjoy using a hex-editor to tinker around with Super Famicom ROMs in my free time - I’m certainly not anti-coding. As OP said, though, AI is now pretty good at generating working code - it’s daft not to use it as a tool.
I don’t think it’s at the point where it helps people code more easily, but maybe I’m just exclusively experiencing edge cases and turning to it for the wrong uses. I’ve only had failures. Hallucinations that waste my time, and flawed algorithms.
My favorite was a few weeks ago when I was having a rough day and needed a complicated algorithm to make a decision based on an inputted date. I told it that if I plug in value A to its algorithm, the answer is wrong. It went step by step explaining its "reasoning"and it returned the correct answer and then at the pivotal step it plugged in a different year than was in A, for just that step, and then proceeded to confirm to itself that if you plug in A, you get the right answer.
Maybe someday it will help, or maybe some problems it is useful for, I’ve just never had that experience.