(no title)
cryptonector | 7 days ago
> [...]
> - It’s simple and minimal - it does only what’s needed, in a way that both humans and machines can understand now and maintain in the future.
But do the humans need to actually understand the code? A "yes" means the bottleneck is understanding (code review, code inspection). A "no" means you can go faster, but at some risk.
AlexCoventry|7 days ago
> The resulting code does not always match human stylistic preferences, and that’s okay. As long as the output is correct, maintainable, and legible *to future agent runs*, it meets the bar.
https://openai.com/index/harness-engineering/
Quothling|7 days ago
I always thought of things like code reviews as semi pseudo-science in most cases. I've sat through meetings where developers obviously understand the code that they are reviewing, but where they didn't understand anything about the system as a whole. If your perfect function pulls on 800 external dependencies that you trust. Trust because it's too much of a hazzle to go through them. I'd argue that in this situation you don't understand your code at all. I don't think it matters and I certainly don't think I'm better than anyone else in this regard. I only know how things work when it matters.
If anything, I think AI will increase human understanding without the need to write computer unfriendly code like "Clean Code", "DRY" and so on.
xyzsparetimexyz|7 days ago
How?
hansmayer|6 days ago