3 ms·
>Yes, coding is not software engineering It absolutely is. >Even if I generate a 1,000 line PR in 30 minutes I still need to understand and review it. Since I
by coldtea 9mo ago
>Yes, coding is not software engineering
It absolutely is.
>Even if I generate a 1,000 line PR in 30 minutes I still need to understand and review it. Since I am responsible for the code I ship, this makes me the bottleneck.
You don't ship it, the AI does. You're just the middleman, a middleman they can eventually remove altogether.
>Now, I would be lying if I said I didn’t use LLMs to generate code. I still use Claude, but I do so in a more controlled manner.
"I can quit if I want"
>Manually giving claude the context forces me to be familiar with the codebase myself, rather than tell it to just “cook”. It turns code generation from a passive action to a deliberate thoughtful action. It also keeps my brain engaged and active, which means I can still enter the flow state. I have found this to be the best of both worlds and a way to preserve my happiness at work.
And then soon the boss demands more output, like the guys who left it all to Claude and even run 5x in parallel give.
- Ygg2 9mo ago> It absolutely is. It isn't. Coding is to software engineering, what calculation is to math. A necessary but insufficient condition. > And then soon the boss demands more output, like the guys who left it all to Claude and even run 5x in parallel give. You can get 100x output for 1/100x the price, if you replace the monthly Claude subscription with a Markov chain. Think of the efficiency gains. Sure, it will be garbage, but think of the velocity.
- coldtea 9mo ago>It isn't. Coding is to software engineering, what calculation is to math. A necessary but insufficient condition. It is that, but to Computer Science, its lofty academic cousin. To Software Engineering coding is an essential part.
- Ygg2 9mo agoOk, fine, if you gonna be nitpicky, it's a calculation to an electrical engineer. > To Software Engineering coding is an essential part. Not really. You can be a Principal Engineer/Architect/Maintainer and do very little coding, but lots of code review and testing. The point is, if you're just banging out code, then you're a software developer. If you use the engineering design process (research, requirements, design document, feasibility, conceptual design, prototype, detailed design) to solve problems using software, then you're a software engineer.
- coldtea 9mo ago>Not really. You can be a Principal Engineer/Architect/Maintainer and do very little coding, but lots of code review and testing. Those are usually software astronauts and dead weight. But of course they think highly of themselves. I'd take someone who does that and codes a hell of a lot, like Linus or Lattner anyday of the week.
- Ygg2 9mo ago> I'd take someone who does that and codes a hell of a lot, like Linus or Lattner anyday of the week. Funnily enough, I had Linus in mind as a sort of no-coding Principal Engineer/Architect/Maintainer. He famously said he doesn't code anymore [1]. So I guess he's dead weight by your logic, right? [1]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H8Gd9t7FQqI&t=8m54s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H8Gd9t7FQqI&t=8m54s
- coldtea 9mo ago>Funnily enough, I had Linus in mind as a sort of no-coding Principal Engineer/Architect/Maintainer. He famously said he doesn't code anymore [1]. That's after he coded his ass out for 20 years. And he's doing reviewing and merging, which is not some lofty "software architect" function, but deals directly with written code.
- Ygg2 9mo agoI've met more Software Architects that coded their asses off for 10+ years than pure-type astronauts. Does that make them real software architects?
- coldtea 9mo agoIf they're Linus level sure. I've met more than enough clueless "have coded sometime in the past but have not touched a PC in 10 years" types promoted to such roles...