• codeinabox ( codeinabox@programming.dev ) OP
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    40
    ·
    5 months ago

    This quote from the article really sums it up:

    And to be clear, I don’t care whether you typed the code yourself. I care whether you understood it before you shipped it. I care whether you can explain why the bug happened, why this fix is the right fix, what the model might have missed, and what would make you roll it back.

    • SorteKanin ( SorteKanin@feddit.dk ) 
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      5 months ago

      I have this feeling that a lot of people are against AI-generated code, even if you use it in this “responsible” way - but maybe I’m seeing an exaggerated view? I’m sort of wondering if I should start using AI models in my own work, including open source stuff, but I don’t want it to be like I’m just having the AI do everything for me and I’m worried that others will disregard the code as slop. I’ve seen a lot of frustration with new open source projects that are largely AI-generated, but then again, we’re seeing a lot of those because it’s a useful tool that lowers the barrier for a lot of work. I’m conflicted, anyone have thoughts?

  • idriss ( idriss@lemmy.ml ) 
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    5 months ago

    This has to be one of 3 things:

    • Their bug/code base is really trivial
    • They are not good at their job and missed important things
    • The Claude code they are using is really different than the one I am using

    Because I was experimenting with LLMs since gpt 3.5, still use them on and off because FOMO and they are still shit for anything that’s not trivial