3 ms·
The intentional disregard for software quality in your comment is honestly disturbing. If your quality threshold is so low that you can tolerate crashes on inv
by imiric 1y ago
The intentional disregard for software quality in your comment is honestly disturbing.
If your quality threshold is so low that you can tolerate crashes on invalid input, you will certainly cut corners when building software for others. I wouldn't want to use a piece of software you wrote, let alone have you on my team.
> I don't care very much if my coworkers use an LLM to write code or not, since all the code gets reviewed by someone else
Ah, yes, let's kick the can down the road.
> if the proposer of the change doesn't even bother to check it themselves then they pay the social cost for it
... The side effects of shoddy code are not redeemed by "paying a social cost". They negatively impact your users, and thus the bottom line of your company.
- bananapub 1y ago> The intentional disregard for software quality in your comment is honestly disturbing. why? my shitty sales dashboard at work doesn't control a rocket or a pacemaker. the crappy my-weird-org-mode-table-to-re-arranged-CSV convertor isn't either. not all software is safety critical, and in any case, I'm the human who ran the code generator and then the code and I'm responsible for my dashboard crashing or my convertor deleting the photos of my cat. should an LLM replace human code review? no. can I use an LLM for my own dumb projects? of course.