Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

In-IDE Code Generation from Natural Language: Promise and Challenges

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2101.11149 v3 pith:JTZKGI4H submitted 2021-01-27 cs.SE

classification cs.SE
keywords codedevelopergenerationretrievalchallengeslearningmachineaccuracy
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

A great part of software development involves conceptualizing or communicating the underlying procedures and logic that needs to be expressed in programs. One major difficulty of programming is turning concept into code, especially when dealing with the APIs of unfamiliar libraries. Recently, there has been a proliferation of machine learning methods for code generation and retrieval from natural language queries, but these have primarily been evaluated purely based on retrieval accuracy or overlap of generated code with developer-written code, and the actual effect of these methods on the developer workflow is surprisingly unattested. We perform the first comprehensive investigation of the promise and challenges of using such technology inside the IDE, asking "at the current state of technology does it improve developer productivity or accuracy, how does it affect the developer experience, and what are the remaining gaps and challenges?" We first develop a plugin for the IDE that implements a hybrid of code generation and code retrieval functionality, and orchestrate virtual environments to enable collection of many user events. We ask developers with various backgrounds to complete 14 Python programming tasks ranging from basic file manipulation to machine learning or data visualization, with or without the help of the plugin. While qualitative surveys of developer experience are largely positive, quantitative results with regards to increased productivity, code quality, or program correctness are inconclusive. Analysis identifies several pain points that could improve the effectiveness of future machine learning based code generation/retrieval developer assistants, and demonstrates when developers prefer code generation over code retrieval and vice versa. We release all data and software to pave the road for future empirical studies and development of better models.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. From Legal Text to Tech Specs: Generative AI's Interpretation of Consent in Privacy Law

    cs.SE 2025-07 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

    An LLM pipeline that flags and fixes non-compliant consent use cases works imperfectly: it catches about two-thirds of relevant cases with reasoning prompts, and most of its fixes are legally sound but logically inconsistent.

Pith tools