3 ms·
I generally agree, except if the program is a one-time program meant to generate a single output and then you throw it away. Until recently I would say such pr
by IshKebab 1y ago
I generally agree, except if the program is a one-time program meant to generate a single output and then you throw it away.
Until recently I would say such programs are extremely rare, but now AI makes this pretty easy. Want to do some complicated project-wide edit? I sometimes get AI to write me a one-off script to do it. I don't even need to read the script, just check the output and throw it away.
But I'm nitpicking, I do agree with it 99% of the time.
- hinkley 1y agoI often write those sorts of tools iteratively. By the time you’ve done something five times, it’s probably part of your actual process, and you should start treating it as normal instead of exceptional. Even if admitting so feels like a failure. So I staple something together that works for the exact situation, then start removing the footguns I’m likely to hit, then I start shopping it to other people I see eye to eye with, fix the footguns they run into. Then we start trying to make it into an actual project, and end game is for it to be a mandatory part of our process once the late adopters start to get onboard.