I’ve been using Github Copilot for a few weeks now and it’s really helpful. I’ll likely keep the subscription on that one. Curious about the other ones mentioned here 🤔
I don’t personally have it, but I am using webstorm 2024.1 beta that has line generation. This is simply tab to complete the generated line, escape to remove the gen and focus on intellisence.
I won’t lie, the line gen is crap. I’d rather use my self hosted RefactAI docker but the plugin isn’t compatible for 2024.1 yet
The conversational part is really good though. I love that it has access to my code without having to paste it so I can just say “on line 274” or something. It’s apparently not good at generating code but if you were using it for that you should learn how to code. But it’s really good at fixing errors and issues.
I don’t use chat, as it never really have been more than a digital rubber ducky for me.
And it’s not really generating lots of code. Most of the time it’s just generating constructors/factory functions, or something easy like summing a vector of integers.
My philosophy is that my brain comes first, if the AI did what I was thinking of, then press tab. I ain’t debugging a AI made function for two hours when I can make it in an hour
It’s the same way for me. I don’t know if my work is this trivial or I’m just “good enough” at it, but it takes me much longer to prompt the chat to get what I want than it takes me to just write it myself.
I honestly kinda feel like I’m using this ai stuff wrong, but outside of generating some basic unit tests and a little better auto complete it feels kinda useless in my day to day work.
And you’ll see it again because the weirdest websites get ChatGPT integration and there will eventually come another person who stumbles upon such a thing for the first time and post it here.
Does anyone remember when something like this actually happened? Maybe it’s the Mandela effect but U sweat at one stage a whole heap of sites were using black/dark mode to save the planet
ed, the “standard editor” (according to its man page) and the predecessor of vi (the “visual editor”), is a terminal editor that doesn’t automatically display any of the text you’re working on; you have to use the p (“print”) command to display the lines your wish to see.
If you have a Linux or Mac handy, you can trying it out! It’s…kinda wild. If you know some Vim commands that start with :, there’s a good chance they’ll work in ed, except you don’t type : itself (effectively you’re always in “command mode”).
There’s also a novelty Twitter account, @ed1conf, that tweets about ed.
Some coworkers told me a story about a previous job candidate who said his preferred editor was ed. They thought it would be really interesting to see someone actually use it. But during the actual interview, when he opened ed, he didn’t recognize or understand it; he was actually accustomed to a graphical editor that he thought was called ed because he apparently did all his work on a system where someone had symlinked or aliased ed to a modern tool.
I just went through this exact process (not for the first time) two weeks ago with a bug in the golang standard library. Fun times. Deep in the dependency stack of a container build my team doesn’t own so who knows when I’ll get a fixed version.
While being interrogated in his introduction sequence, he casually folds an aluminum chewing gum wrapper, puts it to his lips and kinda whistles with it for a second, while holding a cell phone in front of his mouth. After this little public display of phreaking, he hands the cell phone over to the hero and says “Here… now you can call anywhere free for life with it”.
The main reason I never got into Slow Horses was its utterly ridiculous stereotype of the “computer boffin”. It was so cack-handed it was almost hard to believe.
Downside is that it includes your indentation whitespace, though I doubt chatgpt would care about that, as I’d imagine it gets discarded when it’s tokenized, but it’s still good to keep in mind when using " " ".
When there’s a limit to the size of a commit message it does make it difficult to actually list all the changes, so sometimes this is all you can write.
I know in theory you’re meant to commit little and often, but in practice it doesn’t always work out that way.
Even if you have a big commit, you can always write something more descriptive than this. And commit messages can be huge, so the limit shouldn’t be an excuse to write a useless message.
For those wondering how to exceed the 70 (80) recommended character limit and still follow best practices:
Write the title on the first line, keep below 70 characters.
Make two (2) newlines
Write one or more descriptive paragraphs.
The first line will be shown as commit message, and the full text can usually be viewed by checking out the commit. Sentences can span multiple lines, but try to keep the line length below 70 characters for best readability.
This off the top of my head, so feel free to correct me if I’ve misremembered the best practices.
I generally write a single line summary and then a list of the specifics like:
Did stuff (except more detailed than that)
- The first thing I did
- Maybe some more detail about the first thing because there's a rationale to explain
- The second thing I did
- Third thing
Changelogs are published to stakeholders. So what I’m saying is you don’t have to try to enforce a commit style using got hooks if you have public shaming at your disposal.
programmer_humor
Top
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.