. . . where the would-be italics are what copilot would likely suggest for completion.
And if it’s wrong, you just. . . keep typing. It’s autocomplete, just like IDEs have for other things. I’m kind of astounded that people have such an emotional reaction to an optional, low-key, passive, easily-ignored tool that sometimes saves a bunch of typing. Yes, if you always accept the suggestions you’ll have problems. Just like literally every other coding assistance tool.
That's not my blog, I just thought the example to be relevant.
> I was thinking more like:
That example is straight up from any of those "programming is not bound by typing speed" essays of yore.
> people have such an emotional reaction to an optional, low-key, passive, easily-ignored tool that sometimes saves a bunch of typing.
Maybe because it's not generally advertised by proponents as "an optional, low-key, passive, easily-ignored tool that sometimes saves a bunch of typing"? Just look at the rest of the thread, it's pronounced as a game-changer in productivity.
Different experiences, I guess. I’m a low end, part-time hobbyist programmer, and for me at least 75% of my time is spent essentially typing in obvious, easily-checked code. It has been a game changer for me. It’s also led me to write better comments, because rather than being a pure tax, they improve the generated code.
I can see how someone who’s always working on sophisticated, mentally challenging code would get less benefit and would see more frequent errors.
And if it’s wrong, you just. . . keep typing. It’s autocomplete, just like IDEs have for other things. I’m kind of astounded that people have such an emotional reaction to an optional, low-key, passive, easily-ignored tool that sometimes saves a bunch of typing. Yes, if you always accept the suggestions you’ll have problems. Just like literally every other coding assistance tool.