4 ms·
If we increase the velocity of changes to a codebase, even if those changes are being reviewed, it stands to reason that the rate of issues will increase due to
by emseetech 1y ago
If we increase the velocity of changes to a codebase, even if those changes are being reviewed, it stands to reason that the rate of issues will increase due to fatigue on the part of the reviewer.
Consider business pressures as well. If LLMs speed up coding 2x (generously), will management accept losing that because of increased scrutiny?
- bluefirebrand 1y ago> will management accept losing that because of increased scrutiny If they don't then they're stupid This has been the core of my argument against LLM tools for coding all along. Yes they might get you to a working piece of software faster, but if you are doing actual due diligence reviewing the code they produce then you likely aren't saving time The only way they save you time is if you are careless and not doing your due diligence to verify their outputs
- hluska 1y ago> If they don't then they're stupid They’re just not experienced because this has never happened before. But when you call them stupid, they’re not going to listen to you because they won’t like you.
- galbar 1y agoHasn't balancing quality (in this context due diligence) and speed (AI code gen.) been the name of the game in the industry for ever? Management should have enough experience by now to understand the trade-off.
- bluefirebrand 1y agoI don't care if stupid people like me
- thfuran 1y agoDo you care if they do what you want? Because telling someone they're stupid and you don't care about their opinion is not conducive to persuading them to listen to you.
- bluefirebrand 1y agoI'm not wealthy or famous so no one gives a crap what I say anyways I don't believe people can actually be persuaded by words in today's age