How is it different from the status quo of people just doing the wrong thing or copy pasting bad code? Yes there's the whole discussion below about float currency values, but I could very well see the opposite happening too, where this thing recommends better code that the person would've written otherwise.
> How is it different from the status quo of people just doing the wrong thing or copy pasting bad code?
Well, yes, the wrong code would be used. However - the wrong code would then become more prevelant as an answer from gh, causing more people to blindly use it. It's a self-perpetuating cycle of finding and using bad and wrong code.
Hmm, not quite. My point was that if they aren't a good enough programmer to understand why the code is wrong, then chances are they would've written bad code or copy pasted bad code anyways. It just makes the cycle faster.
And again, I could argue that the opposite could happen too, people who would otherwise have written bad code could be given suggestions of better code that they would've written.
> Hmm, not quite. My point was that if they aren't a good enough programmer to understand why the code is wrong, then chances are they would've written bad code or copy pasted bad code anyways. It just makes the cycle faster.
No, not quite. It also makes the cycle more permanent and its results deeply ingrained, which is what is actually relevant.
Either way it wouldn’t matter since the only thing short of stopping the cycle is stack overflow to close down and a new stack overflow not to open up. A very unlikely scenario for this industry. Either way , no matter the difference in time frame, the result would have always been permanent.
It seems that copilot lets one cycle through options, which is an opportunity for it to facilitate programmers moving from a naive solution to one they hadn't thought of that is more correct.
(Unclear to me yet whether the design takes advantage of this opportunity)
