3 ms·
> And I would definitely expect that such a conversion would have resulted in hideous, non-idiomatic code in the target language. and we don't know what is th
by riku_iki 2y ago
> And I would definitely expect that such a conversion would have resulted in hideous, non-idiomatic code in the target language.
and we don't know what is the quality of end code, it is possible that tech debt created by migration is well higher than 1.5 eng/y.
- bobxmax 2y agoDo you really think Airbnb software engineers would accept the final code if it was low quality? Seriously, the wishful thinking around this stuff is embarassing.
- riku_iki 2y agoThere are plenty of tech bros in corps who push some hyped stuff, add to resume and move to next gig. Not sure why do you think airbnb is different.
- shermantanktop 2y agoHave you tried it? I’ve done something similar to this type of work with an llm. It produces code that is often too idiomatic, in that it introduces conventional approaches that are overkill for the task at hand. But this is almost an ideal scenario, because if the previous tests run clean, the newly converted tests can only fail by being wrong. They can also silently reduce the tested scenarios, but that’s what code reviews are for.
- riku_iki 2y agoI use LLM for coding every day. LLMs can totally make something super dumb: oh this test is broken, gatcha, lets replace it with something which is not broken (but very different). > They can also silently reduce the tested scenarios, but that’s what code reviews are for. code review of complicated scenarios is about as resource demanding as actually writing code, so shrinking time spent from 1.5y to 6 weeks totally can produce lower quality.