[sefrost]

Is it possible for humans to review that amount of code?

My understanding of the current state of AI in software engineering is that humans are allowed (and encouraged) to use LLMs to write code. BUT the person opening a PR must read and understand that code. And the code must be read and reviewed by other humans before being approved.

I could easily generate that amount of code and make it write and pass tests. But I don't think I could have it reviewed by the rest of my team - while I am also taking part in reviewing code written by other people on my team at that pace.

Perhaps they just aren't human reviewing the code? Then it is feasible to me. But it would go against all of the rules that I have personally encountered at my companies and that peers have told me they have at their companies.

[Hamuko]

>BUT the person opening a PR must read and understand that code.

The AI evangelists at my work who say this the loudest are also the ones shipping the most "did anyone actually look at this code?" bugs.

[sefrost]

It's very easy to not read the code, just like it's very easy to click "approve" on requests that the agent/LLM makes to run terminal commands.

[Bridged7756]

I'm appalled this isn't talked about more. Understanding code let alone code written by others is where the real complexity lies. I fail to see how more written code by some dumbass AI that gets things wrong half the time is going to make the job less draining to me. I can only conclude that half the devs of the world, or more, don't really do code reviews, or just rubber stamp crap.