It's amusing that people still default to "human-written code is solid and AI code sucks" after the enormous quantity of bugs that AIs are finding in human-written code.

Honestly aesthetically, good human code is always >> Opus 5.5.

For example, recently Opus 5.5, in some multithreaded app I was working on at work, used complex timing analysis with hardcoded time values 1.2, 0.95 etc to ensure that some activities only happen in a sequence (A->B->C). I had to tell it to just serialize these activities by putting them in a buffer. Both versions passed all tests (I’m sure it wasted a lot of time tuning the first set of numbers to pass the tests, but no human would do that nonsense). Increasingly, you feel it’s thinking diverging from humans more and more as the labs lean into RL.

Nobody has ever said human code is perfect. But it is empirically the case that code written by LLMs is on average lower quality than code written by humans.