Though then have to be careful. I had a requirement to implement a security feature in an unfamiliar language. I gave it a shot and upon reviewing the output, if the code had worked as it wrote it, then it would have had a gaping security hole a mile wide making things worse than they already were, and the bit needed to implement the security was a waste of time. In this case, two wrongs made a right, as it also hallucinated some functions that didn’t exist so the code wouldn’t have even built.
I can see LLM integrated into the IDE maybe providing a quicker entry to some very obvious logic, but it’s a careful UI consideration in terms of balancing offering helpful capabilities versus making the user undo a bunch of times when it was in fact not helpful.
This is just Advanced Intellisence, something Visual Studio already supports. And again - that’s totally fine. I appreciate an occasional “Did you realize you don’t actually use that declared variable anywhere? Here, let me make that code more legible for you.” coding assist.
But you’re not getting an end-to-end automation of a Full Stack Development job and it was crazy to think you would.
Note that I would imagine it as a bit more, like recognizing a pattern where you are going to want to iterate over some iterable and do something super common, I could see an LLM managing to do that better than something like current code completion solutions can. Could also extend it in ways not normally feasible. For example, use something like golang and the IDE can do crazy amounts of completion because so much is specified. In a more loose scenario like javascript or python, the traditional approach can do… some, but a lot more gaps appear since things are too open ended for those approaches to work.
The thing I cited was like a 12 line function that I figured it would get right. But it failed and hallucinated. I had to resort to like result 7 or 8 in an internet search before someone offered a correct solution, so it’s still matching my LLM experience so far, not any better than blindly clicking the first search result and hoping for the best. It can handle some token swap out compared to a traditional copy/paste, but ultimately you are best served by finding the most well maintained library to offload if it’s not something you really need to write yourself.
![AI [Saturday Morning Breakfast Cereal]](https://www.smbc-comics.com/comics/1740504999-20250225.png){kind=link}
Though then have to be careful. I had a requirement to implement a security feature in an unfamiliar language. I gave it a shot and upon reviewing the output, if the code had worked as it wrote it, then it would have had a gaping security hole a mile wide making things worse than they already were, and the bit needed to implement the security was a waste of time. In this case, two wrongs made a right, as it also hallucinated some functions that didn’t exist so the code wouldn’t have even built.
I can see LLM integrated into the IDE maybe providing a quicker entry to some very obvious logic, but it’s a careful UI consideration in terms of balancing offering helpful capabilities versus making the user undo a bunch of times when it was in fact not helpful.
This is just Advanced Intellisence, something Visual Studio already supports. And again - that’s totally fine. I appreciate an occasional “Did you realize you don’t actually use that declared variable anywhere? Here, let me make that code more legible for you.” coding assist.
But you’re not getting an end-to-end automation of a Full Stack Development job and it was crazy to think you would.
Note that I would imagine it as a bit more, like recognizing a pattern where you are going to want to iterate over some iterable and do something super common, I could see an LLM managing to do that better than something like current code completion solutions can. Could also extend it in ways not normally feasible. For example, use something like golang and the IDE can do crazy amounts of completion because so much is specified. In a more loose scenario like javascript or python, the traditional approach can do… some, but a lot more gaps appear since things are too open ended for those approaches to work.
The thing I cited was like a 12 line function that I figured it would get right. But it failed and hallucinated. I had to resort to like result 7 or 8 in an internet search before someone offered a correct solution, so it’s still matching my LLM experience so far, not any better than blindly clicking the first search result and hoping for the best. It can handle some token swap out compared to a traditional copy/paste, but ultimately you are best served by finding the most well maintained library to offload if it’s not something you really need to write yourself.