Skip to main content

Is canvas + ChatGPT a problem or an opportunity: Coding part 1


OpenAI has just announced canvas (https://openai.com/index/introducing-canvas/ ) with ChatGPT as a beta in ChatGPT Plus. Canvas is an extra interface along with the standard prompt interface which we have got used to. In an earlier post, I started discussing using Canvas for reports, but what about coding? People have been using generative AIs for coding, including code generation from prompts, but what does it do when we use canvas.


So let's play. The new interface for canvas does support coding (as does ChatGPT) - could it be a programmer's friend/assistant? 

In the example below ChatGPT was asked via an initial prompt to produce a pseudo-code for the start of a murder-mystery style game, but to also use canvas. 




What it produces is a form pseudo-code in the style of Python; not a great surprise there, as ChatGPT is not bad at generating Python code.

So, can it convert the pseudo-code to something other than Python? The two examples below show conversion to C and JavaScript






You can edit in the canvas window, and just as in the report-generating application (see  reports ); also, inside the window, you can highlight and get a prompt request. In the javascript version a few lines are highlighted, now let us get canvas to add more locations and characters by using ask ChatGPT that comes up when the text is highighted.
It has added two of each to the code.

Converting it to Python, and asking it for features to add to createCharacters()


The suggestions have been shown of the canvas screen and comes with apply button. The figure below shows the addition of the new features.

A feature I like about ChatGPT and coding is getting it to add in extra comments for a persona for example "now add in extra comments to explain the code for a beginner to python"

It feels more like a programmer's assistant than standard ChatGPT.

In part 2 I want to explore its ability to: 
- review code
- bug fixing 


All opinions in this blog are the Author's and should not in any way be seen as reflecting the views of any organisation the Author has any association with. Twitter @scottturneruon
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Using an LLM to Find Themes using Thematic Analysis in an Academic Career

B rief recap In an earlier post, “Same prompt, four AIs: why answers aren’t always the same” , I looked at what happened when the same prompt was given to four different LLMs. Unsurprisingly, perhaps, the answers were not identical. That raised an interesting follow-on question: what was the prompt actually trying to do? The answer is that it was trying to support a form of thematic analysis. In that case, the object of analysis was an academic profile, including my Google Scholar profile. The version I discuss here is a modified prompt, used with Claude.ai, where I uploaded a CV and asked the system to find other appropriate public resources connected with a named person and institution. The aim was not simply to summarise the CV, but to identify visible and less visible themes across a whole career. Why use thematic analysis? Thematic analysis is widely used by academics, especially in qualitative research. Braun and Clarke’s well-known paper, Using thematic analysis in psy...
Post a Comment
Read more

Prompt Engineering, Context Engineering and Agentic AI in Higher Education: A Short Briefing

AI in Education Prompt engineering, context engineering and agentic AI are often used interchangeably, but the literature treats them as distinct. Prompt engineering concerns crafting effective single instructions to a model (Glean, 2026). Context engineering is the broader discipline of designing and managing the entire informational environment around a model—memory, retrieval, tool outputs and conversation state—rather than a one-off instruction (Abstracta, 2026); prompt engineering operates within the context window, while context engineering determines what fills it (arXiv:2606.12422, 2026). Agentic AI describes systems that plan and execute multi-step tasks with delegated autonomy, raising organisational questions of accountability rather than purely technical ones (MIT Sloan, 2026; Palo Alto Networks, 2026). There is genuine debate about prompt engineering's durability. IEEE Spectrum (2025) reported research suggesting prompting is increasingly performed by models themse...
Post a Comment
Read more

AI as a Mirror: Transforming Vague Student Ideas into a More Rigorous Project Agreement

The Problem: The "Generic App" and the "Time Sink" We’ve all been there: a student walks into a 1-to-1 with a vague desire to "do something with AI" or "build a fitness app." You spend 45 minutes trying to find a technical "hook" that justifies a Level 6 or Level 7 grade, only for the student to drift back into "CRUD app" territory by week three. The Philosophy: AI as a Mirror Instead of you doing the heavy lifting, this workflow uses AI as a Mirror . It reflects the student’s own skills and career goals back to them, but with the structural rigour of a virtual supervisory team. It’s not about the AI "giving" the idea; it’s about the AI forcing the student to defend and refine their own concepts until they hold water. The Framework: 3 Months of Rigour This prompt is specifically designed for intensive/conversion MSc or summer capstone projects . It assumes a tight 12-week implementation window. By forcing the AI to w...
Post a Comment
Read more