Depends on the algorithm. When you've been coding for a few decades, you really, really don't want to write yet another trivial algorithm you've written multiple tens of times in your life. There's no joy in it.

Let the LLM do the boring stuff, and focus on writing the fun stuff.

Also, setting up logging in Python is never fun.

▲

foobarbecue 4 days ago | parent | next [-]

Right-- it's only really capable of trivial code and boilerplate, which I usually just copy from one of my older programs, examples in docs, or a highly-ranked recent SO answer. Saves me from having to converse with an expensive chatbot, and I don't have to worry about random hallucinations.

If it's a new, non-trivial algorithm, I enjoy writing it.

▲

BeetleB 3 days ago | parent [-]

For me, it's a lot easier getting the LLM to do it than browsing through multiple SO answers, or even finding some old code of mine.

Oh, and the chatbot is cheap. I pay for API usage. On average I'm paying less than $5 per month.

> and I don't have to worry about random hallucinations.

For boilerplate code, I don't think I've ever had to fix anything. It's always worked the first time. If it didn't, my prompt was at fault.

	▲	Mallowram 2 days ago \| parent [-]
		The reason it is code and not glyphs that summarize boilerplated function is to keep the chance for innovation open. Once the code becomes automated to this scale, it indicates the language is dying. AI is simply automated undertaking, not advancement. Look big picture, not small-minded expediency.

▲

a5c11 3 days ago | parent | prev [-]

> Also, setting up logging in Python is never fun.

import logging

	▲	BeetleB 3 days ago \| parent [-]
		Not fun at all. Configuring it to produce useful stuff (e.g. timestamps, autologging exceptions, etc). Very boilerplate and tedious.