[slt2021]

I am proponent of Clean and Simple architecture that follows standard patterns.

because they are easier to maintain, there should be no clever tricks or arch.

all software arch should be boring and simple, with as few tricks as possible, unless it is absolutely warranted

[lmm]

A pattern is a structured way of working around a language deficiency. Good code does not need patterns or architecture, it expresses the essence of the actual business problem and no more. Such software is also significantly easier to maintain if you measure maintainability against how much functionality the software implements rather than how many lines of code it is. Unfortunately the latter is very common, and there is probably a bright future in using LLMs to edit masses of LLM-copy-pasted code as a poor man's substitute for doing it right.

[skydhash]

Simplicity is hard. And difficulty is what almost everyone using LLMs is trying to avoid. More code breed complexity.

I read somewhere that 1/6 of the time should be allocated to refactoring (every 6th cycle). I wonder how that should be done with LLMs.

[valenterry]

Exactly that. LLMs generate a lot of simple and dumb code fast. Then you need to refactor it and you can't because LLMs are still very bad at that. They can only refactor locally with a very limited scope, not globally.

Good luck to anyone having to maintain legacy LLM-generated codebases in the future, I won't.

[dartos]

I’ve noticed LLMs quickly turn to pulling in dependencies and making complicated code

[skydhash]

I'm sure they do great for scripts and other stuff. But the few times I tried, they always go for the most complicated solutions. I prefer my scripts to grow organically. Why automate something if I don't even know how it's done in the first place? (Unless someone else is maintaining the solution)