> It can get pretty hairy when you already have well-established customers with long-term use-cases that absolutely cannot be broken LLMs are often poor at wri

> It can get pretty hairy when you already have well-established customers with long-term use-cases that absolutely cannot be broken LLMs are often poor at writing tests that provide useful information to human readers and poor at writing tests that can survive project evolution. To be fair, humans are also poor at these tasks if done in hindsight, after all the information you normally want to capture in tests has been forgotten. That boat has been missed for the legacy code no matter how you slice it. But LLMs are quite good at writing tests that lock in existing functionality in the rawest way. It seems like LLM-generation is actually the best hope of saving such a project?