Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Using AI-Based Coding Assistants in Practice: State of Affairs, Perceptions, and Ways Forward

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 2406.07765 v2 pith:SHUN56UQ submitted 2024-06-11 cs.SE cs.AIcs.CY

classification cs.SEcs.AIcs.CY
keywords assistantsstagesdevelopersdevelopmentsoftwareactivitiesfuturegenerating
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

0 comments
read the original abstract

Context. The last several years saw the emergence of AI assistants for code - multi-purpose AI-based helpers in software engineering. As they become omnipresent in all aspects of software development, it becomes critical to understand their usage patterns. Objective. We aim to better understand how specifically developers are using AI assistants, why they are not using them in certain parts of their development workflow, and what needs to be improved in the future. Methods. In this work, we carried out a large-scale survey aimed at how AI assistants are used, focusing on specific software development activities and stages. We collected opinions of 481 programmers on five broad activities: (a) implementing new features, (b) writing tests, (c) bug triaging, (d) refactoring, and (e) writing natural-language artifacts, as well as their individual stages. Results. Our results provide a novel comparison of different stages where AI assistants are used that is both comprehensive and detailed. It highlights specific activities that developers find less enjoyable and want to delegate to an AI assistant, e.g., writing tests and natural-language artifacts. We also determine more granular stages where AI assistants are used, such as generating tests and generating docstrings, as well as less studied parts of the workflow, such as generating test data. Among the reasons for not using assistants, there are general aspects like trust and company policies, as well as more concrete issues like the lack of project-size context, which can be the focus of the future research. Conclusion. The provided analysis highlights stages of software development that developers want to delegate and that are already popular for using AI assistants, which can be a good focus for features aimed to help developers right now. The main reasons for not using AI assistants can serve as a guideline for future work.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID 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. Developer Perspectives on Licensing and Copyright Issues Arising from Generative AI for Software Development

    cs.SE 2024-11 accept novelty 6.0 of 10

    A plurality of developers would place AI-generated code in the public domain, most see it as similar to reusing existing code, and few document AI usage or have copyright training.

Pith tools