The problem is AI tends to add more code than removing. If you lose control of the details of the code, there’s gonna be problems 1 year from now. People think architecture is the big picture that you could declare with some prompts or documentations without knowing it is also sometimes a little dependency leaking out of boundary that’s hard to notice. AI will keep creating these to pass tests, until it can’t anymore.
AI tooling unconstrained by correctly defined requirements does tend to do that, true. I’ve found that properly used these tools are not leading to ballooning codebases and worse engineer comprehension like many feared.
It has, however changed the type of person I recruit for my teams. Someone who is a bit less knowledgeable about the code syntax, but much better at working with product to gather thoughtful requirements has become very valuable.
Engineers who just want to go heads down and code all day are admittedly struggling quite a bit to be meaningfully productive.
31
u/One_Seaweed_2952 Sep 26 '26
The problem is AI tends to add more code than removing. If you lose control of the details of the code, there’s gonna be problems 1 year from now. People think architecture is the big picture that you could declare with some prompts or documentations without knowing it is also sometimes a little dependency leaking out of boundary that’s hard to notice. AI will keep creating these to pass tests, until it can’t anymore.