That sounds like the advice of someone who doesn't actually write high-quality code. Perhaps a better title would be "how to get something better than pure slop when letting a chatbot code for you" - and then it's not bad advice I suppose. I would still avoid such code if I can help it at all.

▲

dasil003 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

This take is pretty uncharitable. I write high quality code, but also there's a bunch of code that could be useful, but that I don't write because it's not worth the effort. AI unlocks a lot of value in that way. And if there's one thing my 25 years as a software engineer has taught me is that while code quality and especially system architecture matter a lot, being super precious about every line of code really does not.

Don't get me wrong, I do think AI coding is pretty dangerous for those without the right expertise to harness it with the right guardrails, and I'm really worried about what it will mean for open source and SWE hiring, but I do think refusing to use AI at this point is a bit like the assembly programmer saying they'll never learn C.

▲

Akranazon 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Man, you are really missing out of the biggest revolution of my life.

This is the opinion of someone who has not tried to use Claude Code, in a brand new project with full permissions enabled, and with a model from the last 3 months.

▲

whynotminot 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

This is a fading but common sentiment on hacker news.

There’s a lot of engineers who will refuse to wake up to the revolution happening in front of them.

I get it. The denialism is a deeply human response.

▲

falloutx an hour ago | parent | next [-]

Its only revolutionary if you think engineers were slow before or software was not being delivered fast enough. Its revolutionary for some people sure, but everyone is in a different situation, so one man's trash can be other man's treasure. Most people are treading both paths as automation threatens their livelihood and work they loved, also still not able to understand why would people pay to companies that are actively trying to convince your employer that your job is worthless.

Even If I like this tech, I still dont want to support the companies who make it. Yet to pay a cent to these companies, still using the credits given to me by my employer.

	▲	whynotminot an hour ago \| parent [-]
		Of course software hasn’t been delivered fast enough. There is so so so much of the world that still needs high quality software.

▲

computerex 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

It's insane! We are so far beyond gpt-3.5 and gpt-4. If you're not approaching Claude Code and other agentic coding agents with an open mind with the goal of deriving as much value from them as possible, you are missing out on super powers.

On the flip side, anyone who believes you can create quality products with these tools without actually working hard is also deluded. My productivity is insane, what I can create in a long coding session is incredible, but I am working hard the whole time, reviewing outputs, devising GOOD integration/e2e tests to actually test the system, manually testing the whole time, keeping my eyes open for stereotypically bad model behaviors like creating fallbacks, deleting code to fulfill some objective.

It's actually downright a pain in the ass and a very unpleasant experience working in this way. I remember the sheer flow state I used to get into when doing deep programming where you are so immersed in managing the states and modeling the system. The current way of programming for me doesn't seem to provide that with the models. So there are aspects of how I have programmed my whole life that I dearly miss. Hours used to fly past me without me being the wiser due to flow. Now that's no longer the case most of the times.

▲

pletnes an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Claude code is great at figuring out legacy code! I dont get the «for new systems only» idea, myself.

▲

notpachet 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

> in a brand new project

Must be nice. Claude and Codex are still a waste of my time in complex legacy codebases.

	▲	bornfreddy 27 minutes ago \| parent \| next [-]
		What are you talking about? Exploring and explaining the legacy codebases is where they shine, in my experience.
	▲	bigfishrunning 2 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		Brand new projects have a way of turning into legacy codebases

▲

xandrius an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Look up luddites on Wikipedia, might be too deep to see the similarities though.

▲

computerex 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Can you be specific? You didn't provide any constructive feedback, whatsoever.

▲

einpoklum 2 hours ago | parent [-]

The article did not provide a constructive suggestion on how to write quality code, either. Nor even empirical proof in the form of quality code written by LLMs/agents via the application of those principles.

	▲	computerex an hour ago \| parent [-]
		Yes it did, it provided 12 things that the author asserts helps produce quality code. Feel free to address the content with something productive.