Lol... you literally asked if you were cheating, now you're mad that you got a response? I never said anything about my own programming skills. Just that I think having a machine statistically spit out answers for you is cheating. Cheaters are never good at the actual game, they can only be good at cheating. They think that the end result is all that matters. That is what I was responding to in regard to judging your code. MagnusCart implied that you will only be judged on the end product, so it doesn't matter how you get there. In other words, they think it is fine to cheat as long as the resulting product looks good. By the same logic, someone who uses a machine to shoot baskets for them is a good basketball player.
Having a friend improve your code isn't learning. The learning part comes when you reach an understanding as to WHY their changes make it better. There is a reason good teachers ask you to explain your answers. Now that's not to say you can't learn from the code that AI produces for you, but just like Googling everything, the instant gratification makes it so easy to just get answers and never really learn. Ironically, people end up learning only when the AI does things wrong, because then they actually have to engage with the problem.
You should also consider that even calling it AI is questionable. It doesn't solve problems, it only conglomerates data and produces answers based on statistics. This is why it sometimes produces wrong answers. Not because it was mistaken about the solution to a problem, but because that wrong answer was simply calculated as being the most probable.