▲ | HuwFulcher 3 days ago | ||||||||||||||||
This is a challenge which I don't think AI tools like Cursor have cracked yet. They're great for laying "fresh pavement" but it's akin to being a project manager contracting the work out. Even if I use Cursor (or some other equivalent) and review the code I find my mental model of the system is much more lacking. It actually had a net negative on my productivity as it gave me anxiety at going back to the codebase. If an AI tool could help a user interactively learn the mental model I think that would be a great step in the right direction. | |||||||||||||||||
▲ | ivape 3 days ago | parent | next [-] | ||||||||||||||||
but it's akin to being a project manager contracting the work out. And that's probably the difference between those who are okay with vibe coding and those who aren't. A leader of a company that doesn't care about code quality (elegant code, good tradeoffs, etc) would never have cared if 10 monkeys outputted the code pre-AI or if 10 robot monkeys outputted the code with AI. It's only a developer, of a certain type, that would care to say "pause" in either of those situations. Out of principal I would not share or build coding tools for these people. They literally did not care all these years about code quality, and the last thing I want to do is enable them on any level. | |||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||
▲ | catigula 3 days ago | parent | prev [-] | ||||||||||||||||
An AI tool can both navigate a legacy codebase and help explain it to you successfully currently, right now, if you're doing it correctly. I've contracted some of this understanding of pieces/intellectual work out to Claude code many, many times successfully. | |||||||||||||||||
|