I'd say it depends.

On the degree the software evolves and will be used.

The reason we've spent years discovering patterns, creating special syntaxes has been to tackle certain domain problems more efficiently and to have systems that can evolve through time.

The only constant is change.

Albeit LLMs chunk out code (and with great know how impressive output), the developer must have the know how to pass a certain threshold.

Writing in unknown languages may seem fine at first. But once you go to the edge, you'll be finding certain quirks, inefficiencies along the way that the LLM may work around it instead of removing it from root.

For example, I've been learning Effect.ts for some weeks now. I've used LLMs extensively, but before that there were a series of manual coding rounds first.

To understand composability, the nitty gritty, where things break, how, how the syntax is formed, and how could I structure some observability challenges I had around the library.

If I hadn't gone through that process, the code quality would be subpar. It wouldn't have been evident at first, but once the system would begin to evolve and adapt to feedback, things would be brittle, existing customers would be affected, and more.

I like to move fast without breaking things