|
|
|
|
|
|
by bluefirebrand
364 days ago
|
|
|
> it turns you into a code reviewer Yes. Not only is this the least enjoyable part of the job in general for me, I think it is a task that a lot of devs, even pretty diligent ones, wind up half assing I personally don't mind reviewing coworkers code because I think it is an opportunity to mentor and learn, but that is not really the case with LLM generated code. That code review becomes purely "Does this do what I want and does it match the style guide" I would much rather LLMs review my code than the other way around. Unfortunately even that workflow is more annoying than anything, because the LLM is often not a good reviewer either I think I just expect more reliability out of the tools I use. |
|
|
That’s acceptable when there is another human who _does_ understand the code (they wrote it) and someone who can learn and grow via the code review process.
None of that applies for LLM-generate code.
In many cases if it fails at the task, it’s much easier for me to just do it myself than to go a couple more rounds with the LLM (cause it’s almost never as easy as a normally code review, you have to prompt better and be more explicit).
That my biggest annoyance with Claude Code/Aider, always feeling like I’m 1 prompt away from everything slotting into place. When, in reality, each time I get back on the merry-go-round it might fix 1 thing and then break another. Or it’s “fix” might be absurd (“I’ll just cast this so it’s the right type” :facepalm:).