All these are useless metrics. It doesn't say anything meaningful on the quality of your life. I would be more interested in knowing if he can now retire in next 5 years instead of waiting another 15?

Or do he now just just get to work for 2 hours and enjoy the remaining 6 hours doing meaningful things apart from staring at a screen.

Sure. I don't doubt it. But let's say if I can make a 100 million pounds appears on your bank account tomorrow. Will you say no to it and go back to your day job?

Both can be true. Being able to do better, more productively work can increase my quality of life. And yes, winning lottery millions would increase my quality of life even more.

However I don’t have lottery millions, but I do have a job and I would like to be able to do it better.

Can you though? What you can do, though, is quit that job you hate and go do something (anything!) else until you find what's right for you.

Obviously I don't. But I was merely pointing at the fact that people don't really love their job but has somehow invented a story that make them believe they do.

Merged PRs. We typically plan out our work, break up into e.g. JIRA tasks, then when we create PR's _very generally_ they should be tied to actual JIRA tickets i.e. pre-planned work. A ticket is usually a requested feature or bug (as reported by an actual user). So my PR rate, or perhaps less controversially my JIRA close rate, is around 3x higher for the last few months. That's also reflected more generally in my feedback productivity wise (i.e. people that are looking at the project as a whole rather than e.g. how many commits I've made). I exclude from 3x side projects and CLI tools, which are weird to quantify - they are typically things that would usually have been ideas in my head I never did at all. I guess I also generally exclude refactoring although I do that more. For example I had claude fix a bug that was dogging our typescript compilation. I couldn't figure out what was so slow about it (>60s to compile). Turned out it was a specific recursive type pulled in by a specific version of a library mixed by usage from one file! It actually took it a while to figure it out, it kept proposing solutions and I had to re-direct it a bunch, using mostly just intuition as opposed to experience. e.g. "No, re-run the diagnostics and look at the debug output, give me three examples of area / commands you could look at and how" and then I'd pick one. I just did that task on the side, I'd go back and look at it output once every day or two, then prompt it with something else, then just go do my usual tasks as though that didn't exist. That type of work given our pace / deadlines / etc, might never have gotten done at least not anytime soon. But I do stuff like that all the time now, I just don't often measure it.

Is that helpful?

Oh good, a new discussion point that we haven't heard 1000x on here.

Have you heard of that study that shows AI actually makes developers less productive, but they think it makes them more productive??

EDIT: sorry all, I was being sarcastic in the above, which isn't ideal. Just annoyed because that "study" was catnip to people who already hated AI, and they (over-) cite it constantly as "evidence" supporting their preexisting bias against AI.

> Have you heard of that study that shows AI actually makes developers less productive, but they think it makes them more productive??

Have you looked into that study? There's a lot wrong with it, and it's been discussed ad nauseam.

Also, what a great catch 22, where we can't trust our own experiences! In fact, I just did a study and my findings are that everyone would be happier if they each sent me $100. What's crazy is that those who thought it wouldn't make them happier, did in fact end up happier, so ignore those naysayers!

It is undoubtedly 3x as many bugs.

This would be a win. Professionals make about 1 bug for every 100 loc. If you get 3x the code with 3x the bugs, this is the definition of scaling yourself.

I think it's just a meaningless sentence.