How GitHub Copilot is getting better at understanding your code
GitHub Copilot's underlying transformers could process only about 6,000 characters at a time, meaning not all of a developer's code could be used as context; the first version was also limited to the single file a developer was actively working in.
Prior to Fill-in-the-Middle, only code before the cursor was included in prompts; code after the cursor was entirely ignored. The original version could also only consider the single active file.
Neighboring tabs increased user acceptance of GitHub Copilot's suggestions by 5% and Fill-in-the-Middle gave a 10% relative boost in performance; GitHub's quantitative research found developers code up to 55% faster while using the pair programmer.
Frequently asked questions
What did this team achieve with this AI workflow?
Neighboring tabs increased user acceptance of GitHub Copilot's suggestions by 5% and Fill-in-the-Middle gave a 10% relative boost in performance; GitHub's quantitative research found developers code up to 55% faster w…
What tools did this team use?
GitHub Copilot, Codex, GPT-3, vector database, Microsoft Azure AI-Platform.
What results were reported?
User acceptance increase from neighboring tabs: 5%; performance boost from Fill-in-the-Middle: 10%; Developer coding speed: 55% faster (source-reported, not independently verified).
What failed first in this deployment?
Prior to Fill-in-the-Middle, only code before the cursor was included in prompts; code after the cursor was entirely ignored.
How is this workflow AI workflow structured?
Developer codes in IDE → Prompt assembly → Neighboring tabs context → Fill-in-the-Middle paradigm → Semantic vector retrieval → Coding suggestion delivered.