(no title)
shsush | 2 months ago
And it makes sense. For most coding problems the challenge isn’t writing code. Once you know what to write typing the code is a drop in the bucket. AI is still very useful, but if you really wanna go fast you have to give up on your understanding. I’ve yet to see this work well outside of blog posts, tweets, board room discussions etc.
submain|2 months ago
The few times I've done that, the agent eventually faced a problem/bug it couldn't solve and I had to go and read the entire codebase myself.
Then, found several subtle bugs (like writing private keys to disk even when that was an explicit instruction not to). Eventually ended up refactoring most of it.
It does have value on coming up with boilerplate code that I then tweak.
maplethorpe|2 months ago
urig|2 months ago
hansmayer|2 months ago
Kubuxu|2 months ago
Understanding of the code in these situation is more important than the code/feature existing.
danenania|2 months ago
Agents make mistakes which need to be corrected, but they also point out edge cases you haven’t thought of.
shsush|2 months ago
I think the reality is a lot of code out there doesn’t need to be good, so many people benefit from agents etc.
heavyset_go|2 months ago
This is negligence, it's your job to understand the system you're building.
hansmayer|2 months ago
yonaguska|2 months ago
PunchyHamster|2 months ago
We've been unfucking architecture done like that for a month after the dev that had hallucination session with their AI left.
shsush|2 months ago
[deleted]