Comment by kentonv
6 days ago
I would say it ended up being much faster than had I written it by hand. It took a few days to produce this library -- it would almost certainly have taken me weeks to write it myself.
6 days ago
I would say it ended up being much faster than had I written it by hand. It took a few days to produce this library -- it would almost certainly have taken me weeks to write it myself.
> It took a few days to produce this library -- it would almost certainly have taken me weeks to write it myself.
As mentioned in another comment https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44162965 I think this "few days" is unrealistic given the commit history. I think it would be more accurate to say it allowed you to do something in under one month that may have have taken two. A definite improvement, but not a reduction of weeks to days.
Or is that history inaccurate?
I replied there: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44165668
does reviewing have the same fidelity as writing ?
reminded me of my university classes where i took my own notes vs studied someone else's notes. you can guess which one was superior.
It's certainly true that my own recall of the code would be better if I had written it by hand.
But I don't think the final code is all that far off from what I would have written.
If you had written it by hand would the verification process been as time consuming?
i.e. overall including the time spent verifying that it was correct, do you consider it a net win?
I was already including my own time spent verifying the output, which I mostly did right away as the code was being generated (approving or rejecting each edit).
And the separate security review would have been required either way.
So yes, it saved time.