On Sat, Jun 28, 2025, 06:49 Thomas Passin <[email protected]> wrote:
> I've been finding it helpful to prompt not to emit any code except for > snippets to illustrate a point. Then I hold a discussion of a proposed > approach. Only then do I ask for some code. I think using the chatbots can > provide some of the benefits of pair programming. But you need to be > involved closely for the best results. > > Remember the old saying, that you need to be twice as smart to debug code > as to write it. So if your code is as clever as you can make it, then you > are not smart enough to debug it. > So far I have yet to see any code come out of a chatbot written in ostensibly BASH that I cannot understand. Some try to use in some circumstances different code structures than I would have used, and chatGPT a year ago decided instead of a case/esac list, let's go and instead parse an array 10 times over for a value every single value being checked every single time. But what they do is save me a massive amount of time just to get what I think is a simple concept in my mind converted into the actual code that will completely effectively do what I needed to do. Even though cccpu was something like 50+ revisions of code that I think I ended up with, I don't think I would have been able to come up with a specification for the end product quite that easily at the beginning. I am very much an iterative developer in that sense. Mike -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "leo-editor" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/leo-editor/CAN%2B%2B4hH1cOMhUdVpxbtjN0ZZxh_HApykJrJoJoM%2Brfn6KcOE%2Bw%40mail.gmail.com.
