Hacker Neue

Preferences
cbsmith parent
There's an implied assumption here that code you write yourself doesn't need to be reviewed from a context different from the author's.

There's an old expression: "code as if your work will be read by a psychopath who knows where you live" followed by the joke "they know where you live because it is future you".

Generative AI coding just forces the mindset you should have had all along: start with acceptance criteria, figure out how you're going to rigorously validate correctness (ideally through regression tests more than code reviews), and use the review process to come up with consistent practices (which you then document so that the LLM can refer to it).

It's definitely not always faster, but waking up in the morning to a well documented PR, that's already been reviewed by multiple LLMs, with successfully passing test runs attached to it sure seems like I'm spending more of my time focused on what I should have been focused on all along.

Terr_
There's an implied assumption here that developers who end up spending all their time reviewing LLM code won't lose their skills or become homicidal. :p
cbsmith OP
Fair enough. ;-)

I'm actually curious about the "lose their skills" angle though. In the open source community it's well understood that if anything reviewing a lot of code tends to sharpen your skills.

Terr_
I expect that comes from the contrast and synthesis between how the author is anticipating things will develop or be explained, versus what the other person actually provided and trying to understand their thought process.

What happens if the reader no longer has enough of that authorial instinct, their own (opinionated) independent understanding?

I think the average experience would drift away from "I thought X was the obvious way but now I see by doing Y you were avoid that other problem, cool" and towards "I don't see the LLM doing anything too unusual compared to when I ask it for things, LGTM."

cbsmith OP
It seems counter intuitive that the reader would no longer have that authorial instinct due to lack of writing. Like, maybe they never had it, in which case, yes. But being exposed to a lot of different "writing opinions" tends to hone your own.

Let's say you're right though, and you lose that authorial instinct. If you've got five different proposals/PRs from five different models, each one critiqued by the other four, the needs for authorial instinct diminish significantly.

layer8
I don’t find this convincing. People generally don’t learn how to write a good novel just by reading a lot of them.
jyounker
On the other hand, people who write good novels tend to read a lot. Reading isn't sufficient, but intensive reading generally seems to be required.
ramraj07
That's a great perspective but its possible you're in a thread where no one wants to believe AI actually helps with coding.

This item has no comments currently.