> I thought you were gonna go the opposite direction with this. Debugging is now 100x as hard as writing the code in the first place.

100x harder if a human were to debug AI-generated code. I was merely citing other people's beliefs: AI can largely, if not completely, take care of debugging. And "better", rewrite the code altogether. I don't see how that could be a better approach, but that might just be me.

▲

furyofantares 4 hours ago | parent [-]

I still run into plenty of situations where the LLM-agent wrote the code really inexpensively, but is totally unable to debug it, and you can sink tons of time trying to get it to do so before giving up with nothing to show for it, and trying to figure it out yourself.

▲

jannyfer 4 hours ago | parent [-]

What kind of code do you work on, and what model & harness do you use? Genuinely curious so I can calibrate my understanding.

I work on enterprise web apps for a few dozen people with Codex CLI and GPT-5.4, and haven't really run in to those issues.

	▲	furyofantares 3 hours ago \| parent [-]
		I make a lot of very small casual games. I've used both Claude Code and Codex CLI extensively, I pretty much always use whatever is the best model + highest thinking level, although I have been off Codex since just before 5.4 came out.