I'm not sure what this comment is supposed to imply?
Are you bad at code reviews? Is the code you're reviewing fairly standard?
GPT misses nuance. It can't reason while you still can. It certainly can do certain tasks better than you but certainly humans can do better at other tasks (specifically in the creativity side, logic, and when it comes to nuanced thinking). But if you're always focused on being quick (quantity over quality) then yeah, I think GPT could replace you. Otherwise, I don't know how anyone comes to this conclusion.
I've seen it notice logic errors in proprietary non-standard code that a human missed. It may not be able to literally "reason" through your code but it can follow the logic pretty well. I've even been able to have it pretty accurately comment the "intent" (vs. function) or spaghetti code with some reasonable accuracy.
i think i'm better than the average senior developer at code reviews, but of course your reference point for the average senior developer may be different from mine. if you'd like to find out, we can schedule a jitsi call where i review some of your code, and you can post your assessment in this thread afterwards
gpt-4 makes stupid logic errors a lot, and i agree that sometimes it's bad at nuance, inappropriately applying heuristics in a context where they're inapplicable. it's much more creative than people are, though, and people also have those same flaws
Comments
I'm not sure what this comment is supposed to imply?
Are you bad at code reviews? Is the code you're reviewing fairly standard?
GPT misses nuance. It can't reason while you still can. It certainly can do certain tasks better than you but certainly humans can do better at other tasks (specifically in the creativity side, logic, and when it comes to nuanced thinking). But if you're always focused on being quick (quantity over quality) then yeah, I think GPT could replace you. Otherwise, I don't know how anyone comes to this conclusion.
I think you may be discounting GTP.
I've seen it notice logic errors in proprietary non-standard code that a human missed. It may not be able to literally "reason" through your code but it can follow the logic pretty well. I've even been able to have it pretty accurately comment the "intent" (vs. function) or spaghetti code with some reasonable accuracy.
i think i'm better than the average senior developer at code reviews, but of course your reference point for the average senior developer may be different from mine. if you'd like to find out, we can schedule a jitsi call where i review some of your code, and you can post your assessment in this thread afterwards
gpt-4 makes stupid logic errors a lot, and i agree that sometimes it's bad at nuance, inappropriately applying heuristics in a context where they're inapplicable. it's much more creative than people are, though, and people also have those same flaws