> Chose boring technology. I genuinely find myself picking libraries that have been around for a while partly because that way it’s much more likely that LLMs w

> Chose boring technology. I genuinely find myself picking libraries that have been around for a while partly because that way it’s much more likely that LLMs will be able to use them. This is an appeal against innovation. > I’ll finish this rant with a related observation: I keep seeing people say “if I have to review every line of code an LLM writes, it would have been faster to write it myself!” > Those people are loudly declaring that they have under-invested in the crucial skills of reading, understanding and reviewing code written by other people. I suggest getting some more practice in. Reviewing code written for you by LLMs is a great way to do that. As someone who has spent [an incredible amount of time reviewing other people's code](https://github.com/ziglang/zig/pulls?q=is%3Apr+is%3Aclosed https://github.com/ziglang/zig/pulls?q=is%3Apr+is%3Aclosed), my perspective is that reviewing code is fundamentally slower than writing it oneself. The purpose of reviewing code is mentorship, investing in the community, and building trust, so that those reviewees can become autonomous and eventually help out with reviewing. You get none of that from reviewing code generated by an LLM.