It produces excellent quality code. I discussed this with my colleague and we agreed that it produces code of better quality then a lot of senior devs. When it’s capable of code reviews it’s a major game changer.
> On 22 May 2023, at 3:56 pm, Seymour J Metz <[email protected]> wrote: > > Its utility will depend on the quality of the code it produces. Can it be > trained to produce clean maintainable code? > > > -- > Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz > http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3 > > ________________________________________ > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [[email protected]] on behalf of > David Crayford [[email protected]] > Sent: Sunday, May 21, 2023 11:57 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: XEDUT vs. ISPF (was: Typo ...) > >> On 22 May 2023, at 8:15 am, Farley, Peter >> <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Please explain what "co-pilot" in this context means. I am not familiar >> with that reference. > > Github co-pilot is an AI programming assistant. You can ask it to do things > like write a search algorithm or a Java servlet application. It’s powered by > OpenAI the deep learning technology used by ChatGPT. It builds its language > model from millions of lines of open source code. I’m interested if it could > be trained on large legacy code bases written in languages like COBOL. This > would be very useful onboarding next gen developers as the inevitable skills > shortage is already starting to bite. > > I doubt that ISPF will be used by next gen devs who are being trained to use > VS Code which supports copilot. It’s not just for GUI IDEs though, Microsoft > have released a Vim (neovim) plugin https://github.com/github/copilot.vim. > >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List <[email protected]> On Behalf Of >> David Crayford >> Sent: Sunday, May 21, 2023 7:47 PM >> To: [email protected] >> Subject: Re: XEDUT vs. ISPF (was: Typo ...) >> >> Has anybody developed a co-pilot plugin for ISPF yet? :) >> >>> On 21 May 2023, at 3:42 pm, Seymour J Metz <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> Well, I am a TSO bigot and grew up on CLIST, but once I had REXX available >>> in TSO/E I bid CLIST a fond AMF. As is common in such cases, while REXX is >>> in general far better than EXEC2 and CLIST, there are things that that it >>> lacks. >>> >>> ISPF versus XEDIT is harder.ISPF has significant advantages as an >>> application framework, and ISPF/PDF EDIT has some nice features that XEDIT >>> lacks, but XEDIT is on balance a much better editor. >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz >>> ________________________________________ >>> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [[email protected]] on >>> behalf of Jack Zukt [[email protected]] >>> Sent: Saturday, May 20, 2023 3:55 AM >>> To: [email protected] >>> Subject: Re: XEDUT vs. ISPF (was: Typo ...) >>> >>> Hi, >>> That made for some interesting reading. I was quite proficient with >>> REXX and XEDIT before moving to MVS and ISPF. The first MVS I worked >>> with did not yet have REXX. It was helish doing the transition to ISPF and >>> CLIST. >>> I still find VM help much better than MVS's. One of the first things >>> that I do when starting on a new MVS system is to put an edit macro >>> named QQ on the SYSPROC or SYSEXEC concatenation, so that I do not >>> have to write CANCEL. I really do not like having that on a pfkey. Too >>> much grief because of that. >>> I find that XEDIT environment capabilities permit us to tailor our >>> working environment far more than ISPF but, as always, I think that >>> has more to do with our path than with the products themselves. >>> As I said at the beginning, it really was an interesting reading. >>> Regards >>> Jack >>> >>>> On Sat, May 20, 2023, 00:08 Paul Gilmartin < >>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> On Fri, 19 May 2023 18:32:57 -0400, Phil Smith III wrote: >>>>> ... >>>>>> I was trying to automate that in a macro on PF3. >>>>> >>>>> Yeah, that makes sense. >>>>> >>>> I learned a smattering of ISPF before any XEDIT; the latter in the >>>> era before PQUIT and QQIT intruded: the wrong solution. But I >>>> immediately longed for ISPF's smart END which did a Save only when >>>> needed and left the timestamp unchanged otherwise. >>>> >>>> And I was irritated by XEDIT's behavior of *always* scrolling to >>>> center the target of a successful search, usually needlessly >>>> >>>> And it was disappointing that the XEDIT-based *LIST menus always ran >>>> in separate rings, never sharing with each other, PEEK, and XEDIT. >>>> They should have used ADDRESS XEDIT instead of CMS. >>>> >>>> I wasted too much time scripting around such things, never modifying >>>> IBM code, only using undocumented interfaces. >>>> And it all went for naught when a major update broke them >>>> >> -- >> >> This message and any attachments are intended only for the use of the >> addressee and may contain information that is privileged and confidential. >> If the reader of the message is not the intended recipient or an authorized >> representative of the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any >> dissemination of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have >> received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by e-mail >> and delete the message and any attachments from your system. >> >> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, >> send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
