3 ms·

Do you really care about extensibility and maintenance when you could just generate an entirely new component when you want more features or need to upgrade the

Do you really care about extensibility and maintenance when you could just generate an entirely new component when you want more features or need to upgrade the library?

rchaud 3y ago
If the team that came up with the prototype assumes that responsibility, then no, I don't. I'm sure an AI will understand how to refactor the codebase on an adhoc basis without creating any problems down the line.
- CamperBob2 3y ago
  Not a matter of refactoring. AI should ideally regenerate the code from the spec each time the requirements change. "Programming" won't go away, but it will refer to working with specification languages, not implementation languages. In the best of all possible worlds, you'd have to deal with the C++ or JavaScript code about as often you have to dig into the x86 or ARM assembly code now.
  - lobsterthief 3y ago
    The second you need to do something the AI can’t do, you’ll be trudging through garbage and breaking tons of things in regression (causing either errors or visual bugs). In your scenario, AI will likely produce code that _it_ determines to be maintainable, or if it’s rebuilt each time as you suggest, then it doesn’t need to be maintainable or readable at all. Good code is written for teams, not individuals. It’s written for future you and future people who you will never meet.
    - CamperBob2 3y ago
      You'll find that argument holds up well at first, but it won't age well at all. None of the "AI can't do X" arguments will. The most popular programming language in 2030 -- 2035 at the latest -- will be English. Few people will GAF whether the underlying generated code is readable or styled for human understanding, any more than they care about the compiler's machine language today. Some will, of course, but it'll be a rarefied, specialized career practiced only by gurus on mountaintops, as assembly programming is now.

Do you really care about extensibility and maintenance when you could just generate an entirely new component when you want more features or need to upgrade the library?

rchaud 3y ago

If the team that came up with the prototype assumes that responsibility, then no, I don't. I'm sure an AI will understand how to refactor the codebase on an adhoc basis without creating any problems down the line.

CamperBob2 3y ago
Not a matter of refactoring. AI should ideally regenerate the code from the spec each time the requirements change. "Programming" won't go away, but it will refer to working with specification languages, not implementation languages. In the best of all possible worlds, you'd have to deal with the C++ or JavaScript code about as often you have to dig into the x86 or ARM assembly code now.
- lobsterthief 3y ago
  The second you need to do something the AI can’t do, you’ll be trudging through garbage and breaking tons of things in regression (causing either errors or visual bugs). In your scenario, AI will likely produce code that _it_ determines to be maintainable, or if it’s rebuilt each time as you suggest, then it doesn’t need to be maintainable or readable at all. Good code is written for teams, not individuals. It’s written for future you and future people who you will never meet.
  - CamperBob2 3y ago
    You'll find that argument holds up well at first, but it won't age well at all. None of the "AI can't do X" arguments will. The most popular programming language in 2030 -- 2035 at the latest -- will be English. Few people will GAF whether the underlying generated code is readable or styled for human understanding, any more than they care about the compiler's machine language today. Some will, of course, but it'll be a rarefied, specialized career practiced only by gurus on mountaintops, as assembly programming is now.