Comments by "Aden Wellsmith" (@adenwellsmith6908) on "I Didn’t Believe that AI is the Future of Coding. I Was Right." video.

  1. Guess who reads your emails. 😂
    4
  2.  @A.-wm1nj  That's the bit I like about the AI. A digital mentor. Please critique the following code. It's not a human. There's no emotion involved. There's no revealing of weaknesses. Code review. Asking it to improve code. The other is boiler plate. I did an analysis of a very large OO application. The ratio of secondary classes to core classes was 7+ to one. One business class, needed DB support. It needed the UI to manage it. It needed unit testing, .... Now those secondary classes are ideal to be generated by AI. But there are other things that I think are better. There's a Microsoft project called Pex. Combine that with DBC [design by contract] and ask, do you need unit tests? Unit tests set up the preconditions. Run. Test post conditions. That's what they do. Why not do that more often? [Performance is the reason]. Why not have an algorithm generate the tests by running the code, making sure you get compelte code coverage, identify missing pre/post conditions? See PEX.
    3
  3.  @alessela7119  And when they are read by AI, that's doubling down.
    2
  4. There are issues. How do you control the AI? 1. For example the one I use can't control what type of docstrings it generates. 2. I would like a whole of app analysis. 3. Bias. I can easily detect bias in code generation. It's clear that the code bases are older, so there's a bias to older code, not newer more modern libraries. Now I've seen examples where the code generated is very good. Even better that I had writen and I've learned from it. That's interesting. As an aside, I did write a small script to generate a dictionary for the Enlish language. That was very good. But control over the output is a real deficiency.
    2
  5. Put some of your code through the ringer. Ask ChatGPT to critique it, or/and improve it. See what it comes up with. No ego, give it a go.
    1