I think most people believe it unlikely that one million line of codes can be reviewed in one week, and the fact that tests pass does not imply good code.

I have no idea whether the new or old code is/was good, just pointing out what seems like a plausible thought process for people who object to this rewrite.

> A human is not reviewing every weld.

On civil engineering projects, I’m pretty sure a human reviews each weld. For mass-produced things, maybe not, although a company would not look good in a lawsuit if they had inadequate inspection procedures which allowed a fault causing injury or death to occur.

I'm saying that's self-evidently ludicrous. Software is not like welding. Do you think Notch could have become rich and famous by welding? How about Bill Gates, famous as a really consistent welder?

There's no way that AI develops software from now on. It isn't remotely good enough for that, nor has it really gotten better in the past few years. We're going to see a push to use AI, then a move away from it once the dreadful quality of AI slop becomes too obvious to ignore.