|
|
|
|
|
|
by jamauro
455 days ago
|
|
|
I agree with you but as a thought exercise: does it matter if there is a lot of boilerplate if ultimately the code works and is performant enough? Fwiw, most of the time I like writing code and I don't enjoy wading through LLM-generated code to see if it got it right. So the idea of using LLMs as reviewers resonates. I don't like writing tests though so I would happily have it write all of those. But I do wonder if eventually it won't make sense to ever write code and it will turn into a pastime. |
|
|
Yeah it matters because it is almost guaranteed that eventually a human will have to interact with the code directly so it should still be good quality code
> But I do wonder if eventually it won't make sense to ever write code and it will turn into a pastime
Even the fictional super-AI of Star Trek wasn't so good that the engineers didn't have to deeply understand the underlying work that it produced.
Tons of Trek episodes deal with the question of "if the technology fails, how do the humans who rely on it adapt?"
In the fictional stories we see people who are absolute masters of their domain solve the problems and win the day
In reality we have glorified chatbots, nowhere near the abilities of the fictional super-AI, and we already have people asking "do people even need to master their domains anymore?"
I dunno about you but I find it pretty discouraging