JetBrains IDEs are highly extensible, and they have support for AI completions. Nevertheless, I think that the assistance and navigation features in IDEs are much more useful than auto-generating half-broken code.
I've spent a few weeks trying the built-in AI in IntelliJ, and the Copilot plugin as well.
I have to say that even though sometimes both AIs offer amazing suggestions, it's really distracting to me to have constant multi-line completions being suggested non-stop! And sometimes it's a suggestion that would probably make sense in a widely different context, but you can see how the AI would believe it was appropriate for you anyway and you start wondering about nonsense. I had to disable that.
The line-completion that IntelliJ has by default now was quite a bit better IMO. It really helped and was not so distracting.
Anyway, I can't tell which AI was best, they both seemed similar in capabilities. The JB AI is a bit more well integrated, obviously, so it's a bit easier for me to accept completions for example (with Copilot, sometimes it competes with the normal IDE completions and I can't easily pick one). Anyone has an opinion on that?
> The line-completion that IntelliJ has by default now was quite a bit better IMO. It really helped and was not so distracting.
I very much agree. The line-completion is a very well done AI integration.
I think there's a lot of potential to integrate AI into IDEs, but it will likely be less of a low-hanging fruit in comparison with simple code completion.
Ah, I see. It sounds like you haven't tried something like Cursor, on tasks/languages that it performs well on. It'll be interesting for you when you discover what it's like. You don't accept large quantities of implementation ab initio; but they're very good nowadays at modifying and extending with non-broken code.
I have to say that even though sometimes both AIs offer amazing suggestions, it's really distracting to me to have constant multi-line completions being suggested non-stop! And sometimes it's a suggestion that would probably make sense in a widely different context, but you can see how the AI would believe it was appropriate for you anyway and you start wondering about nonsense. I had to disable that.
The line-completion that IntelliJ has by default now was quite a bit better IMO. It really helped and was not so distracting.
Anyway, I can't tell which AI was best, they both seemed similar in capabilities. The JB AI is a bit more well integrated, obviously, so it's a bit easier for me to accept completions for example (with Copilot, sometimes it competes with the normal IDE completions and I can't easily pick one). Anyone has an opinion on that?