That makes sense. When Claude Code suggests a bad approach, I kind of shrug it off and suggest a different approach. I don't think of it like a negative because

That makes sense. When Claude Code suggests a bad approach, I kind of shrug it off and suggest a different approach. I don't think of it like a negative because I basically go through a similar process of ideation before I implement a feature and I typically discard ideas before arriving at the right one so Claude Code is part of the ideation process for me. The code it produces gives me a clear idea about how complex/ugly the solution will be. I know what 'ugly' looks like. I imagine a junior might actually jump at the first solution because they don't have any other arrows in their quiver so-to-speak. The LLM is acting like the engineering manager but it's actually really bad at that. The LLM is like a stereotypical programmer with 0 common sense. The kind who can produce good code but you have to micromanage every single decision. It's terrible if you put it in charge. It doesn't have any opinions about architecture or code quality so it just follows the structure of the existing code base... There's a tendency towards increasing complexity, more hacks more chaos. It often tries to hack/cheat its way to a solution. It requires a constant effort to maintain order.