• laranis@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    edit-2
    6 days ago

    One nit: they’re good at writing code. Specifically, code that has already been written. Software Engineers and Computer Scientists still need to exist for technology to evolve.

    • Mirror Giraffe@piefed.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 days ago

      This. Was setting up a new service and it scaffolded all the endpoints after the swagger and helped me setup tooling, tests, within a few hours. Also helped me research what has happened in the area since my last ms.

      Now when adding the business logic I’ll be doing most of it myself as it tends to be a bit creative about what I’m trying to achieve and tends to forget to check my models etc.

      It’s great at generic code, has issues on specifics.

      • Infrapink@thebrainbin.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        6 days ago

        I feel like if your code is so generic a generator can make it, you could achieve tge same results faster, more reliably, and more energy-efficiently with a shell script or two.

        • Mirror Giraffe@piefed.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          6 days ago

          A specific tool should definitely beat a generic one. If I was doing these things all the time I would consider building something like that, scaffolding based on a swagger seems pretty easily achievable but since I do this every other year tops, and the setup will need to be updated with new techniques it’s fast from a valuable time investment to write for me.