211–220 of 323 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If your TC is 500k-1M and you don’t feel like job hopping anymore, you’d certainly not want to get hit by a random layoff due to insufficient organizational masculinity or whatever. Maintaining a complex blob of mission critical code is one way of increasing your survival chances, though of course nothing is guaranteed.
People doing layoffs have no idea of who works and who's warming the chair.
This is extremely fascinating and finally something that feels extremely tangible as opposed to vibes based ideas around how AI will "take everyone's jobs" while failing to fill in the gaps between. This feels extremely gap filling. I find it quite interesting how we can do a very large chunk of the work up front in design, in order to automate the rest of the work. Its almost as if waterfall was the better pattern a…
Waterfall has always been the best model as long as specs are frozen, which is never the case.
I completely agree, as a fellow senior coder. It allows me to move significantly faster through my tasks and makes me much more productive. It also makes coding a lot less painful because I'm not making typos or weird errors (since so much code autocompletes) that I spend less time debugging too.
I dunno, I just had Copilot sneak in a typo today that took about ten minutes of debugging to find. I certainly could have made a similar typo myself if copilot hadn't done it for me, but, all the same copilot probably saved me a minute worth of typing today but cost me 10 minutes of debugging.
When working with AI for software engineering assistance, I use it mainly to do three things - 1. Do piddly algorithm type stuff that I've done 1000x times and isn't complicated. (Could take or leave this, often more work than just doing it from scratch) 2. Pasting in gigantic error messages or log files to help diagnose what's going wrong. (HIGHLY recommend.) 3. Give it high level general requirements for a problem,…
But it's usually an iterative process, I find pattern A and B on google, I'll ask the LLM and it gives A, B and C. I'll google a bit more about C. Find out C isn't real. Go back and try other people commenting on it on reddit, go back to the LLM to sniff out BS, so on and so on.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>No one says you have to code like those influencers. You are a software engineer, use AI like one, iteratively. This is my issue with all the AI naysayers at this point. It seems to all boil down to "haha, stupid noob can't code so he uses AI" in their minds. It's like they are incapable of understanding that there could simultaneously be a bunch of junior devs pushing greenfield YouTube demos of vibe coding, while…
I think some of the suspicion is that it's really not 10x in practice.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So, most low level functions that enumerate the files in a directory return a structure that contains the file data from each file. Including size. You already have it in memory. Your brilliant AI calls another low level function to get the file size on the file name . (also did worse stuff but let's not go into details). Do you call reading the file size from the in memory structure that you already have a speed opt…
Yep exactly, LLMs blunder over the most simple nonsense and just leaves a mess in their wake. This isn't a mistake you could make if you actually understood what the library is doing / is returning. It's so funny how these AI bros make excuse after excuse for glaring issues rather than just accept AI doesn't actually understand what it's doing (not even considering it's faster to just write good quality code on the f…
Stuff that google search from 10 years ago would have done without pretending it's "AI". But not google search from this year.
* it wasn't able to simply list the fields of the returned structure that contained a directory entry. But since it gave me the name, i was able to look it up via plain search.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The more I browse through this, the more I agree. I feel like one could delete almost all comments from that project without losing any information – which means, at least the variable naming is (probably?) sensible. Then again, I don't know the application domain. Also… def _save_current_date_time(current_date_time_file: str, current_date_time: str) -> None: with Path(current_date_time_file).open("w") as f: f.write(…
> I feel like one could delete almost all comments from that project without losing any information I far from a heavy LLM coder but I’ve noticed a massive excess of unnecessary comments in most output. I’m always deleting the obvious ones. But then I started noticing that the comments seem to help the LLM navigate additional code changes. It’s like a big trail of breadcrumbs for the LLM to parse. I wouldn’t be surpr…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yep exactly, LLMs blunder over the most simple nonsense and just leaves a mess in their wake. This isn't a mistake you could make if you actually understood what the library is doing / is returning. It's so funny how these AI bros make excuse after excuse for glaring issues rather than just accept AI doesn't actually understand what it's doing (not even considering it's faster to just write good quality code on the f…
The "AI" are useful for one thing. I had no idea what functions to use to scan a directory in a native C++ Windows application. Nor that they introduced an abstraction in C++ 2017?. They all work the same (needless fs access should be avoided no matter the OS) but it did give me the names*. Stuff that google search from 10 years ago would have done without pretending it's "AI". But not google search from this year. *…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, it reads like "your precious AI generates first year junior code". Like the original article.
There is nothing wrong with first year junior code that does the job.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I feel like one could delete almost all comments from that project without losing any information I far from a heavy LLM coder but I’ve noticed a massive excess of unnecessary comments in most output. I’m always deleting the obvious ones. But then I started noticing that the comments seem to help the LLM navigate additional code changes. It’s like a big trail of breadcrumbs for the LLM to parse. I wouldn’t be surpr…
LLMs are also good at commenting on existing code. It’s trivial to ask Claude via Cursor to add comments to illustrate how some code works. I’ve found this helpful with uncommented code I’m trying to follow. I haven’t seen it hallucinate an incorrect comment yet, but sometimes it will comment a TODO that a section should be made more more clear. (Rude… haha)