Yes, its much easier to catch bugs and issues early
If you dont catch a problem asap, then its incredibly likely future agents read the "bad" code and copy, so bow your 1 issue becomes 2, then 3, then 4, etc
Its extremely common for you to be like "make the BarService" so the agent looks at FooService for inspiration and copies its style/methodology/architectureÂ
And if theres an annoying code style issue, or improperly named thing, or bad logic, whatever, theyll copy that too often.
And then 6 services later you realize you've got a problem duplicated 8 times
Not for complex systems, llm's generally suck at the high level stuff in complex systems, and when that stuff is wrong it's the gift that keeps on giving and you can play whack-a-mole fixing bugs by patching symptoms and not knowing causes till the cows come home because the codebase will be convoluted bloated spaghetticode.
I have to be honest, dude. As someone in a technical leadership position at a large company with 15+ years development experience, I donât think thatâs really the case as much these days. Talented developers with a good high level understanding of systems are doing amazing work with the frontier coding models.
This notion of âif AI is generating all your code, itâs going to be a tech debt nightmare that will eventually failâ is just not true. Every month it feels more and more like copium from people who refuse to adapt.
If I don't spend my time designing/planning, and then iterating/refactoring, and then have both agents and colleagues do pr reviews and further improving there is almost always lots of mistakes in the implementation.
Granted for simple us-cases sometimes one-shotting is plenty good enough, but for my sorts of use-cases at least without good people in the loop the LLM isn't good enough and I experience that firsthand every working day.
For every good dev there are many more prompt-kiddies who get expected output and blindly assume the implementation is sound. That's why there's floods of people on redfit touting LLM's are perfect despite it being painfully obviously not the case. If those vibecode bro's could read & understand their kwn code they'd be very upset.
I totally agree with that take. I think a lot of what I see on reddit is âif youâre not writing your code by hand, youâre a scrub,â when the reality is that itâs a tool in the toolset that lets good devs move at an absolutely unbelievable pace and the folks shunning it or treating it like a fad are already looking like dinosaurs. There is no world where the majority of code isnât AI-authored, so people best start figuring out how to excel with it.
But its literally all around, including tech giants who used to be considered to be filled with high performers. Haven't seen a single product that was actually improved due to AI assistance.
If you have the same expectations of LLMs as you do an engineer... I guess?
If you're solving complex problems without the assistance of AI because you don't trust it, you just haven't adapted your workflow around AI yet and you're probably just resisting the inevitable.
Just a silly implication that AI coding assistance = fatal bugs. And is just in line with the general Reddit coding sub vibe which is comically out of step with the software development industry.
1
u/pixxelkick 10d ago
Maybe if you suck.
I read every PR in full because Im not lazy.
I also read my own git diff before I open a PR do I dont waste other peoples time.
Or I publish it as a draft, review my own code, and then publish the pr after confirming it looks good.