For me the bottleneck is seldom typing. And while Copilot can sometimes dish out some more advanced stuff, I still have to verify it and understand it. Since I can basically solve every problem I encounter day-to-day, Copilot's contribution is not that useful.
Does it save you $10 worth of your time within a month?
Comments here are wildly uninformed. I see comments complaining about copyright that seem to have no awareness of either fair use doctrine prior law as it relates to partial usage nor the details regarding how infrequently Copilot generates identifiable verbatim results outside attempts to auto fill empty files in empty projects (which seems outside typical usage).
Or complaints that it makes mistakes, as if 90% of those mistakes aren't immediately flagged by the linter. Not only that, but I've found that often when it does make mistakes, it reflects a consistency smell in my own code, such as tripping up on a legacy naming convention that should really be refactored out.
If it doesn't save you $10 worth of time, obviously don't use it. Personally I was worried it was going to be more given the ways in which it cuts down on the most boring parts of a high value profession.
But insinuating that someone's positive experience of the tool reflects inexperience is a weird gatekeeper flex, and honestly I'm more inclined to think that all the curmudgeonly resistance I see in here to the inevitable march of progress instead reflects old dogs unable to adequately learn new tricks (like how to effectively prompt it).
My jurisdiction has no concept of fair use.
Please remember this from the guidelines
> Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize. Assume good faith.
I don't think that's true.
When the parent comment made that observation, they attached the caveat they might not be as skilled as others. They were already fully aware their potential lack of skill might affect their opinion of the product. All you did was repeat that same claim back to them, as if they weren't already aware of it which is a pretty uncharitable interpretation. A steelman interpretation that you could've said would assume there are some low-hanging fruit new or inexperienced developers would benefit from greatly (not just typing as you suggest), but once you develop a certain level of skill, Copilot would become less useful for experts such as yourself.
If anything, you didn't respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what was said, since you willfully disregarded their own insight into the problem.
Then to try and morally lecture someone on their behavior by applying a rule you don't even hold yourself standard to is pretty astonishing.
Or the windows xp leak and how that is a mess for wine/proton/reactos devs
There is no concept of fair use in code copyright
Copilot is 100% a ask for forgiveness later sort of project
This is one of my pet peeves in this field. People create whole programming languages that are "expressive", just to save typing a few dozen characters and have huge tirades against "verbose" languages that require typing a bunch of boilerplate.
If typing the code is the bit that takes the longest for you in a project, stop and take a good look in the mirror. There's something else wrong in the process.
Of course, copilot is only going to save you typing time, and you'll have to pay it back at reading time.
An example here is an infinite list. It's far easier to do that in say Haskell and python, applying filters along the way using higher order and curried functions than it is to do it in say C.
Yes, you can shove a 20 line function into one line with a ton of weird symbols, but the one reading it after you will need to unroll it anyway to understand it so what's the point?
