3 ms·
No thank you. This has a lot of words with very little information. Having codex make changes to code because someone made a request to IT is insane, even if
by avgDev 3mo ago
No thank you.
This has a lot of words with very little information. Having codex make changes to code because someone made a request to IT is insane, even if it needs approval.
Idk man, I feel like I am taking crazy pills.
I use codex everyday but I plan the work and codex performs the work bit by bit, which allows me to review every piece of code. I would not sleep well not knowing what is in production.
- mrmiraclebr 3mo agoIf it leaves less work for me to do, count me in.
- BugsJustFindMe 3mo agoI don't know about you, but I still live in a world where if people don't do work then they soon after don't have a place to live or enough food to eat.
- Someone1234 3mo agoLess work today or less work tomorrow? The problem with "someone makes a request, code changes happen automatically, and all someone else has to do for that to be committed is mash approve" doesn't strike me as a way to create a maintainable code-base. The changes may even work, and may technically fulfill the request, but the agent cannot know the design intent or process intent. Today there may be a programmer sitting between the request and approval, but what about tomorrow? Might it be a non-technical or barely technical middle manager?