My LLM-generated code has so many bugs in it, that I end up knowing it better since I have to spend more time debugging/figuring out small errors. This might even be better: you learn something more thoroughly when you not only practice the right answers, but know how to fix the wrong answers.

▲

bluefirebrand 3 days ago | parent | next [-]

That is absurd

If you write it by hand you don't need to "learn it thoroughly", you wrote it

There is no way you understand code between by reading it than by creating it. Creating it is how you prove you understand it!

	▲	cwnyth 11 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Or, you can copy and paste code from examples, StackExchange, open source code, etc. Or you can read about it once, use it, and forget why it worked. Besides all that, though, it's really the fact that LLMs bring up interesting ways to tackle problems that I hadn't thought of before, or uncover neat libraries/packages (when I program in R) that I just am not aware of.

▲

vlod 3 days ago | parent | prev [-]

For me the process of figuring out wtf I need to do and how I'm going to do it is my learning process.

For beginners my I think this is a very important step in learning how to break down problems (into smaller components) and iterating.