Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by kvuj 87 days ago
How is that different than a human writing the code? Whether an AI or a human wrote it, I would expect the same bar of validity/maintainability.
2 comments

To me, SOTA is just bad at DRY, KISS, succint, well architected, top down, easy to test code and has to be constantly steered to come close. Even the article suggests that. YMMV.
TDD and strong goals help..

..much like with human development.

TDD makes the code test-passable, but it is still rng. As for goals, you can't foresee every stupid thing it will generate. It will look at a state machine, and rather than using the existing event structure, write its own loops and conditions. This is very different compared to human devs. No goal will help. You just keep yanking its chain until it generates as described. It can't even put imports at the top as you described. It can't help making circular refs in c++ despite being specifically told to use a hierarchical structure. Left alone you will get truly unstructured random mess.

People keep making trivial apps with open source examples thinking they found god. Another dismissive comment and I swear.

Because humans make design decisions, AI just bangs it's head against the problem until it gets something that "works".