Other than untracking tracked files, I see nothing in this graphic that isn’t easy to do with a gui. That might even be easy to do but it is something I do in the cli. Can I get some examples?

I would also argue that the common/basic stuff is 99% of what I do with git. And for this I can’t fathom why people would think the cli is better. Like logging and diffing is just so much easier when I can just scroll and click as opposed to having to do a log command, scroll, then remember the hashes, and then write the command. This is something instantly available to me in a gui.

Don’t get me wrong, if the cli is better for you more power to you. We moved from p4 to git and I did this almost exclusively in the cli so I could use scripts more easily. And sometimes I watch beginners use the gui and I have to bite my tongue because I know it would be faster in the cli.

But, especially for a beginner, i strongly recommend a gui.

I guess to each their own because having to hang a cheat sheet on my wall with got commands seems like the exact opposite of good aesthetics to me.

Why not just use a gui? I don’t need something hanging on my wall because it’s all just easy clicking around. And when I do want to use the cli, it’s very easy to bring up.

I gotcha, I misunderstood

I know we were less likely to work on the same file concurrently.

I mean, isn’t that when merge conflicts happen? Isn’t that your answer?

but for beginners? They will have a lot of bugs in their code.

Everyone has lots of bugs in their code, especially beginners. This is why we have testing and qa and processes to minimize the risk of bugs. As the saying goes, “the good news about computers is that they do what you tell them to do. The bad n was is that they do what you tell them to do.”

Programming is an iterative process where you do something, it doesn’t work, and then you give it another go. It’s not something that senior devs get right on the first try, while beginners have to try many times. It’s just that senior devs have seen a lot more so have a better understanding of why it probably went wrong, and maybe can avoid some more common pitfalls the first time around. But if you are writing bug free code in your first pass, well you’re a way better programmer than anyone I’ve met.

Ai is just another tool to make this happen. Sure, it’s not always the tool for the job, just like IoC is not always the right tool for the job. But it’s nice to have it and sometimes it makes things much easier.

Like just now I was debugging a large SQL query. I popped it into copilot, asked if to break it into parts so I could debug. It gave a series of smaller queries that I then used to find the point where it fell apart. This is something that would have taken me at least a half hour of tedious boring work, fixed in 5 minutes.

Also for writing scripts. I want some data formatted so it was easier to read? No problem, it will spit out a script that gets me 90% of the way there in seconds. Do I have to refine it? Absolutely. But if I wrote it myself, not being super prolific with python, it would have taken me a half hour to get the structure in place, and then I still would have had to refine it because I don’t produce perfect code the first time around. And it comments the scripts, which I rarely do.

What also amazes me is that sometimes it will spit out code and I’ll be like “woah I didn’t even know you could do that” and so I learned a new technique. It has a very deep “understanding” of the syntax and fundamentals of the language.

Again, I find it shocking that experienced devs don’t find it useful. Not living up to the hype I get. But not seeing it as a productivity boosting tool is a real head scratcher to me. Granted, I’m no rockstar dev, and maybe you are, but I’ve seen a lot of shit in my day and understand that I’m legitimately a senior dev.

And before stack overflow, we used books. Did we need it? No. But stack overflow was an improvement so we moved to that.

In many ways, ai is an improvement on stack overflow. I feel bad for people who refuse to see it, because they’re missing out on a useful and powerful tool.

Which is, of course, true for every source of information that can point you in a direction.

I’m a senior dev, and copilot as a productivity tool usually pays for the monthly license multiple times per week.

Whenever I hear someone say it’s useless, that tells me they are either some godlike dev who knows everything already (lol), they haven’t actually used it, they are not good at integrating new tools into their workflow, or they simply haven’t learned how to use it yet.

I don’t consider myself a never nester, but looking at my code now, I extract all the time and rarely go 4 tabs in. It just makes it more easily maintainable. I also like the idea of putting the failure conditions first. I haven’t looked at this yet but I’m sure there are some times I can use it.

Sure, sometimes you might not have a choice, but I do think there is a lot of value to what they are saying. I think it kind of goes in line with standard “functions should do one thing” paradigm.

The other poster is either speaking from a place of ignorance, as they’ve never really used it, of they just aren’t smart enough to learn how to use a new tool.

As much as middle management sucks, devs blaming management for their own inability to learn is almost on the same level.

I was lucky enough to get in on my company’s beta test for copilot.

When I hear people say it’s bad, all that tells me is that they are either completely ignorant and have never really used it, or they aren’t good at learning how to use new tools.

I’ve worked in a few places, all with senior engineers, including myself as a senior engineer, all of which the senior engineers spent most of their time actually engineering. If I went somewhere as a senior and was told I was going to be in meetings all day, I would quit because that’s management, not engineering.

We do standups twice a week. At worst they run a half hour for my team of about 10 people. Usually we’re done in 15-20 minutes. Please tell me it’s just an absolutely made up joke that you have an hour and 15 minutes of stand up meetings every day. I would shoot myself.

My 100 year old house has marks on the floor that look like it was worn from a door swinging. Very distinctive arc pattern. Like it was there for many years and was under frequent use.

The problem is that there’s no door there, just a wall, which is also the edge of a dormer…so if there were a door there it would just open out onto a sloping roof.

Every time I register it I contemplate why it’s there and wtf happened.

These threads drive home the point that a GUI of some sort is far superior for most users. I use git kraken, but in the past I’ve used git extensions as well, and I take advantage of so much more git has to offer than pretty much everyone here.

I swear people just want the cli to be better so they claim it is, but I really don’t get how. Especially for quickly scanning the repo, doing diffs, commiting partial files, history, blame, etc.

It’s not making fun of the lifestyle, it’s the the fact that people who partake in these things seemingly bring it up for no reason.

But honestly I can’t remember the last time a vegan brought up being a vegan for no reason. While here on lemmy it seems every opportunity someone has to claim Linux superiority, no matter how weak, they have to let everyone know how “objectively better” they are.

Is equating Linux users to vegans a thing? I came to the conclusion (I thought) on my own…but now reading this here I’m questioning that conclusion

Yeah, I was lucky that I snuck into my company’s pilot program for it.

I’m impressed at how often it predicts what I’m about to do. The code almost always needs a slight bit of editing, but it almost always at least shaves a bit of time off of whatever task I was doing.

I no longer go straight to stackoverflow, I always ask the copilot first. Sometimes even just phrasing the question in natural language, something I wouldn’t do it trying to find it via search or stackoverflow, is kind of like rubber duck debugging, and I’ll come up with the answer while writing it out.

I was originally a chip designer. Then I shifted into embedded development. Now I’m mainly a C# guy.

But when I shifted into embedded development, I also shifted into doing power engineering. I grabbed a couple of books on the topic at hand, taught myself a lot, and designed the electronics to meet the need. We sold the product to city utilities.

I remember one time I was in a room with probably 10 engineers from one of the utilities. After having described the product to them, and went through a lot of our settings and stuff, I was explaining the difference between two of algorithms we put in (because different utilities use different algorithms, and I just wanted one device that could do both). At some point I was like “which of the two algorithms do you use?” and one responded “well, which do you recommend?” So I talked about why I thought one was better than the other.

They all started looking at each other and nodding and saying “Yeah, that’s the one were going to use.” I realize I could have said anything at that point and they would have agreed. They thought I was expert. And that was my “last two frames” of this comic moment.

Now as a senior dev, I’ve seen enough shit to realize that most people have no idea what is going on, and are flying by the seat of their pants. So I figure my ignorance is a little less than theirs, and that gives me a lot of confidence, but I also realize that I can learn a lot from most people.