Search

AI-powered programming assistants are increasingly gaining popularity, with GitHub Copilot alone used by over a million developers worldwide. These tools are far from perfect, however, producing code suggestions that may be incorrect in subtle ways. As a result, developers face a new challenge: validating AI's suggestions. This paper explores whether Live Programming (LP), a continuous display of a program's runtime values, can help address this challenge. To answer this question, we built a Python editor that combines an AI-powered programming assistant with an existing LP environment. Using this environment in a between-subjects study (N=17), we found that by lowering the cost of validation by execution, LP can mitigate over- and under-reliance on AI-generated programs and reduce the cognitive load of validation for certain types of tasks., Comment: 8 pages, 4 figures

Powered by recent advances in code-generating models, AI assistants like Github Copilot promise to change the face of programming forever. But what is this new face of programming? We present the first grounded theory analysis of how programmers interact with Copilot, based on observing 20 participants--with a range of prior experience using the assistant--as they solve diverse programming tasks across four languages. Our main finding is that interactions with programming assistants are bimodal: in acceleration mode, the programmer knows what to do next and uses Copilot to get there faster; in exploration mode, the programmer is unsure how to proceed and uses Copilot to explore their options. Based on our theory, we provide recommendations for improving the usability of future AI programming assistants.