Testing GPT 4's code-writing capabilities with some real world problems
Here&#x27;s my perspective on this as an Architect: Most construction details have been done before, they could be easily reproduced by an AI surely? There&#x27;s usually just a few things that are different from the last time I have drawn it. A few 3D interactions with other components that need to be reasoned about. They are not that complicated individually.<p>But yet I see this problem as well just using old fashioned automation let along AI to save time. I find that if you haven&#x27;t drawn the 2D section through all the different edge cases of a particular thing you are trying to design, you haven&#x27;t done the analysis and you don&#x27;t really understand what&#x27;s happening. I&#x27;ve made mistakes where I&#x27;ve been working in 3D on something complicated and I&#x27;ve had to hide some element to be able to view what I&#x27;m working on, only to find later that when I turn everything on again I&#x27;ve created a clash or something impossible to build. That&#x27;s why we still do 2D drawings because they are an analysis tool that we&#x27;ve developed for solving these problems and we need to do the analysis, which is to draw section cuts through things, as well as building 3D models. After all, if models were such a good way to describe buildings, then why weren&#x27;t we just building physical scale models and giving them to the builders 100 years ago; it&#x27;s because you can&#x27;t see the build-up of the layers and you can&#x27;t reason about them.<p>Reading this article I get the same sense about software engineering, if you haven&#x27;t solved the problem, you don&#x27;t really understand the code the AI is generating and so you don&#x27;t really know if it is going to do what you&#x27;ve tried to describe in your prompt. You still have to read the code it&#x27;s generated and understand what it is doing to be able to tell if it is going to do what you expect.