[nalekberov]

> I really think a lot of the reason some people say it doesn't give them as much productivity as they would like is due largely to a desire to write "clean" code based on years and years of our own training, and due to having to be able to pass code review done by your peers.

Machine doesn't get mad when an app takes forever to start or keeps constantly crashing, but we humans do. Writing "clean" code has the least importance when it comes to machine generated code.

[Jcampuzano2]

People keep reading off this nonsense that AI generated code is always bad or slow.

This is so far from the truth that I really think anybody who still says this has not actually used it for anything real in at least a couple years.

Yes, I'm not saying it will always generate you the best code, sometimes it may even be bad.

What I am saying is it CAN generate code that is reasonably performant, sometimes even more performant than you would have written it given time constraints, and fulfills requirements (even if sometimes it requires a little bit of manual effort) much faster than we ever could before.

[drekipus]

I can only assume that you have significant experience being a junior engineer

[Jcampuzano2]

First off, I would hope that everyone had experience being a junior engineer for some time.

But if your assertion is that using AI for code generation and being successful with it makes you a junior engineer, then good luck keeping your job in the future. Just take a look at social media and there are a plethora of examples of prominent engineers using it with success.

[sgarland]

It generates reasonably performant code because most of the industry isn’t writing code that’s computationally bound. If you have to wait for network I/O anyway, it doesn’t really matter if your code is optimal, because that wait will dominate everything else.