I think we're on the same page re. that study. Actually your link made me think about the ongoing debate around IDE's vs stuff like Vim. Some people swear by IDE's and insist they drastically improve their productivity, others dismiss them or even claim they make them less productive. Sound familiar? I think it's possible these AI tools are simply another way to type code, and the differences averaged out end up being a wash.

IDEs vs vim makes a lot of sense. AI really does feel like using an IDE in a certain way

Using AI for me absolutely makes it feel like I'm more productive. When I look back on my work at the end of the day and look at what I got done, it would be ludicrous to say it was multiple times the amount as my output pre-AI

Despite all the people replying to me saying "you're holding it wrong" I know the fix to it doing the wrong thing. Specify in more detail what I want. The problem with that is twofold:

1. How much to specify? As little as possible is the ideal, if we want to maximize how much it can help us. A balance here is key. If I need to detail every minute thing I may as well write the code myself

2. If I get this step wrong, I still have to review everything, rethink it, go back and re-prompt, costing time

When I'm working on production code, I have to understand it all to confidently commit. It costs time for me to go over everything, sometimes multiple iterations. Sometimes the AI uses things I don't know about and I need to dig into it to understand it

AI is currently writing 90% of my code. Quality is fine. It's fun! It's magical when it nails something one-shot. I'm just not confident it's faster overall