you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 7 points 1 week ago (3 children)

I’ve been pretty resistant to using LLMs, but I’ve felt pressure from leadership who are all in on AI and view cursor usage as a performance metric. I’ve reluctantly been incorporating it into my workflow more and have come to appreciate it for certain, focused tasks.

The best use I’ve found is as an additional reviewer on merge requests. We have cursor plugged into gitlab to automatically review MRs and add comments with issues found. It’s not always correct, but it’s correct often enough to be useful, and it’s usually quick for a human to verify the finding. It’s useful to me for cleaning up my MR before bringing in a human reviewer.

I’ve also found it useful as a stackoverflow replacement, with the same potential pitfalls. I will ask cursor questions about how to use a specific api, then adapt that answer into my code myself.

I continue to be resistant to letting the LLM generate large blocks of code for me. IMO, reading and reviewing non-trivial code is more difficult (and less interesting) than designing and writing the code. Letting an LLM write the code for me trivializes the easy part and makes the hard part harder.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] [S] 3 points 1 week ago

    [...] an additional reviewer [...]

    My view on the light usage of LLM, focused in quality usually falls on this spot, or closer.

    Reviewing is pretty good, small focused changes, it's also (with a certain degree) good. But forget the code and let it be, this is too far. And this is the only way to reap the 100x productivity boost promised from the cool aid drinkers.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 1 week ago

    It's also good for generating boilerplate, one-use scripts where maintainability doesn't count, suggesting solutions, parsing log files, writing test cases (especially if you have templates)...

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

    There is nothing inherently bad with LLMs as a technology -- the issues are because nothing with LLMs happens in a vacuum. The big AI companies are building and using LLMs in the most unethical way possible. Get rid of the waste, theft, misuse, abuse, and generally insanity around LLMs and you're left with a powerful tool.

    Whatever comes from it at that point is on the people using it. The hammer isn't bad because some idiot is trying to drive screws with it.

  • source
  • parent