[TechDebtDevin]

Waitig 30-45 minutes for code, that you're still going to have to read from top to bottom to make sure it doesn't have anything dumb in it, does not seem like a productivity enhancement. I would quit If I was an engineer and told to do this.

[rantallion]

If you're doing nothing in that 30-45 minutes other than stare at a loading screen, you're doing it wrong.

I'm not sold on the efficacy of AI and I share your reservations about having to scrutinise their output, but I see great value in being able to offload a long-running task to someone/something else and only have to check back later. In the meantime, I can be doing something else - like sitting in those planning meetings we all enjoy!

[abossy]

I love sitting in those planning meetings, too. /s

This is exactly right. We've adapted our workflow to kick off a task and then kick off the next one and the next. Then we review the work of each as they come through. It's just CPU pipelining for human workflow.

The process is far from perfect but the throughput is very high. The limiting factor is review. I spend most of my time doing line-by-line review of AI output and asking questions about things I'm unsure of. It's a very different job from the way I historically operated, which involved tight code -> verify loops of manually written code.