@vriska its the version specifically for code. I think they have a general windows version also called copilot and that strikes me as pretty pointless.
The code version can save you a LOT of typing. At least a few hundred lines per day depending on what you're doing.
@RustyCrab@sun@vriska hot take but if your boilerplate is a slog to write then your coding patterns have serious problems, copying and pasting code more than twice should give you alarm bells
Also trying to fold code into itself too much makes you wind up with chromium compile times. It's happened to me before and I learned a lot of lessons from it.
I don't copy and paste but attempting to shove every ounce of logic into a reusable utility function almost universally winds up in disaster later.
@RustyCrab@sun@vriska if your unit tests are repetitive then they're probably close to worthless (or even worse because you can make totally transparent changes to the backend that the user or consumers have absolutely no contracts or knowledge of and then need to refactor all your tests which means your tests are actually slowing your velocity instead of helping it)
@RustyCrab@vriska@sun eh, i mean its your codebase, you're free to live in whatever standard you want. not saying my code is perfect or anything, but I'd say just accepting boilerplate as a fact of life is more third year college student than not.
i will admit that after using more DX/developer productivity minded languages that I've kind of moved away from building perfect ivory towers and more towards systems that let me move fast and be more productive
@shibao@vriska@sun the short explanation is that unit tests in real world projects with real customers and constantly changing requirements are ephemeral trash that pop in and out of existence at random. Attempting to abstract too much code into common paths results in tests that are difficult to change in isolation and end up consuming a lot of production time.
Add comment