3 ms·
"Code quality" here isn't referring to some aesthetic value. Coding agents write code that doesn't converge, meaning code that they cannot evolve after a while.
by pron 7mo ago
"Code quality" here isn't referring to some aesthetic value. Coding agents write code that doesn't converge, meaning code that they cannot evolve after a while. They get to the point where fixing one bug causes another, and then the codebase is in such a state that no human or agent can salvage.
People who say they don't care about the quality of code produced by agents are those who haven't been evolving non-trivial codebases with agents long enough to see just how catastrophically they implode after a while. At that point, everyone cares, and that point always comes with today's agents given enough lines and enough changes.
- alexchen_dev 7mo ago[flagged]
- socketcluster 7mo agoYep. Good quality, succinct code saves time and money. Always has and always will.
- signatoremo 7mo ago> Coding agents write code that doesn't converge, meaning code that they cannot evolve after a while That's not true, and I'm not sure what that even means. It's totally up to you the human to ensure AI code mergable or evolvable, or meet your quality standard in general. I certainly have had to tell Claude to use different approaches for maintainability, and the result is not different than if I do it myself.
- pron 7mo agoSure, if you vigilantly review the agent's output and say no when it's wrong (which happens very frequently) then things work. I meant that without such ver close supervision things don't converge because agents make mistakes that compound.