I use it as a pair programmer some of the time, especially in areas that I'm not super knowledgeable about, like arcane configuration details. I just use the ChatGPT app with cut and paste; I have not yet graduated to AI IDE tools. I'm thinking about it though.
I agree the label often means different things to different people, but ultimately I’m curious to determine if my anecdotal experience of AI being used very sparingly by the top 10% of performers is characteristic of the behavior more broadly, or just an anomaly in my circles. Do you have any thoughts on this?
Its great to get back into programming when you have become rusty because of managerial duties.
I’m a staff-level FE for 8 yrs. My workflow since 2024:
1. Exploration: LLM first, docs second—cuts discovery time by ~3×.
2. Boilerplate: AI generates, I refactor on the spot; never merged blindly.
3. CR: bot leaves a first-pass checklist, humans focus on architecture.
4. Legacy spelunking: 200k-context summary + mermaid call-graph.
5. Rule of three: AI writes glue, I write core, tests cover both.
Result: 30-40% more features shipped per quarter without quality drop.
I use it as a pair programmer some of the time, especially in areas that I'm not super knowledgeable about, like arcane configuration details. I just use the ChatGPT app with cut and paste; I have not yet graduated to AI IDE tools. I'm thinking about it though.
ITT: "Juniors" thinking they are "Seniors" (which by itself are almost useless terms)
I agree the label often means different things to different people, but ultimately I’m curious to determine if my anecdotal experience of AI being used very sparingly by the top 10% of performers is characteristic of the behavior more broadly, or just an anomaly in my circles. Do you have any thoughts on this?