Still the same. "Hey look, I got these crappy developers (LLMs) to actually produce working code! This is a game-changer!" When the working code is a very small, limited thing.
I don't know, your talking about an incredibly talented engineer saying:
"In the past week, just prompting, and inspecting the code to provide guidance from time to time, in a few hours I did the following four tasks, in hours instead of weeks"
Its up to you to decide how to behave, but I can't see any reasons to completely dismiss this. It ends with good guidance what to do if you can't replicate though.
The fact that he's an extremely talented developer actually supports my overall understanding that AI producing code is way over hyped. Sure, a master of his field can get a boost out of it, after spending (unaccounted for) time learning how best to coax good code out of it. Neat?
Any sort of evidence! I see none! It's not really a new thing to have no evidence of productivity gains when it comes to software development tools. Some feel like vim is a huge productivity boost and some don't. Some believe rust is amazing, some hate it. It's really hard to measure these things.
Here’s a professional developer who built a product used across the planet daily saying they built a feature for said product, and then asked AI to build the same feature based on the design doc: the AI succeeded and did the same work in minutes: https://antirez.com/news/158
You could always test this yourself. Draw up a design doc for a problem, and implement it. Then ask an AI to do the same thing. Compare your time.
