Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

I'm going back to writing code by hand

blog.k10s.dev

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

561–570 of 656 posts

Re: I'm going back to writing code by hand

#561

Post by linuxftw »

senordevnyc wrote: post #552
linuxftw wrote: post #418

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you understand these subtle pieces you perceive the AI to get wrong, you should include that in your prompt. Also, unit test and functional test coverage go a long way to ensure correct behavior.

I admire your perseverance, but in mid-2026, I think you’re wasting your breath. The engineers who are virulently anti-AI like this, without being able to engage honestly about the pros and cons, are being driven by their fear and insecurity.

Ostensibly, there may be a third party that benefits from the exchange, rather than the two exchanging ideas.

It is surprising to see how many are still in utter denial around here, though. Maybe we should all go back to punch cards.

Re: I'm going back to writing code by hand

#562

Post by manmal »

spockz wrote: post #228
sevenzero wrote: post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also as a webdev, it writes basic CRUD pretty good. I am tired of having to build forms myself and the LLMs are usually really good at that. Been building a new app with lots of policies and whatnot and instructing a LLM is just much faster than doing the same repetitive shit over and over myself.

If you were tired of writing forms yourself, had you looked at https://jsonforms.io/ ? Just specify the the data you need, or extract it from the api spec and go. Display the form uniformly every time across your site. No need to burn AI time.

I‘ve used it in a previous engagement. Unfortunately it’s not customizable enough, and performance for deep forms is really bad. Also, I‘d definitely use agents to set it up.

Re: I'm going back to writing code by hand

#563

Post by Phelinofist »

pron wrote: post #308
lukan wrote: post #291

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do you define "bad code"? If I instruct the AI to make small modules where I can verify they work, have tests and no side effects - then it is good enough code for me. It works, is readable and can be extended - and will turn into bad code if this is not done with care.

Sure, if you carefully review the agent's output, including tests, you can get good results. If you don't carefully review the output, you obviously have no idea if it's good enough for you. The only way to find out is that 30 changes down the line the agent won't be able to change one thing without breaking another, but by then the codebase will be too far gone to fix.

I get what you mean, but that can also happen with code written by humans.

Re: I'm going back to writing code by hand

#564

Post by ChicagoDave »

dominotw wrote: post #436
ChicagoDave wrote: post #361

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m doing it because as a DDD adherent, I’ve been building software that way for 15 years without GenAI and now with GenAI I can do it faster. You can’t play whack-a-mole with GenAI. You have to start from well-known principles and watch everything it produces. Every module or bounded context has to have its own invariants. You can’t fully automate software engineering with GenAI. It seems the vast majority of GenAI…

[flagged]

I have not discovered anything new. I have applied established architecture and engineering practices that I've been following for 15 years to using Claude Code.

Domain-Driven Design started with Eric Evan's "blue book" in 2003 and continued with Vaughn Vernon's "red book" a few years later. Event Storming workshops and event sourcing data storage have also emerged as important tools.

I am just a practitioner. Eric, Vaughn, Paul Reyner, Alberto Brandolini, and a few other architects lead.

My DevArch guardrails is a toolkit to follow these practices.

Re: I'm going back to writing code by hand

#565

Post by abandonliberty »

nixon_why69 wrote: post #281
meetingthrower wrote: post #273

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So you think "good" management translates? I actually think it very much does. Clear expectations, providing right context and "the why", quick and clear feedback loops, intervening early when they are going off track, not micromanaging too much so they can actually accomplish more. It's all very similar.

Yes it very much does but managing humans is still very different. Understanding your domain, setting clear expectations and understanding limitations and how much ambiguity your people/robots can handle are all good management techniques, they translate. But the nature of working with an always-on flattery machine vs humans that can exceed your expectations while also being sources of infinite drama and frustration…

In addition, a good human knows when to ask for help or feedback. Our AIs are always just as confident whether their output is brilliant or terrible.

That's more or less the opposite of what I'd want.

Re: I'm going back to writing code by hand

#566

Post by sadengineer22 »

9dev wrote: post #411
brightball wrote: post #374

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I heard a talk from a VP at NVIDIA a couple of months ago and he echoed this. Essentially their policy is "you are still fully responsible for the code you ship, whether AI helps with it or not"

Does anyone out there working with AI coding agents not have this policy?

Depends on what is meant by "fully responsible" I guess. At my company non-engineers push code to production where the only reviewer is frequently an LLM, if the code is broken they get an LLM to fix it. The human does not understand the code, they are not even trying to, this is pure vibe coding. We also have engineers who push code to production that they have not written, and not fully read, and has not been read by another human (at least not in detail).

I would say that counts as "not having that policy". Based on what management tells us, we are dead if we don't operate this way.

Re: I'm going back to writing code by hand

#567

Post by LtWorf »

aldousd666 wrote: post #541
pron wrote: post #264

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That doesn't quite work, and precisely for the reason I mentioned: You can definitely tell the AI to follow some strategy, but at some point the strategy will need to change, and the AI won't tell you that (even if you tell it to). Unless you read the code every time you won't know if the AI is following the strategy and producing good results or following it and producing bad results because the strategy has to chan…

you are never going to get away from reading the code every time. at least I haven't seen how you could possibly. That being said, it is considerably less work to read and check the code than it is to have to build it all, even if you know what you're doing and have done it before.

I find this to be false.

Same way teaching your child to do something is much harder than to just do it yourself.

Except the child learns.

Re: I'm going back to writing code by hand

#568

Post by pron »

Kiro wrote: post #443
pron wrote: post #398

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Human developers don't produce code at such a rate, and their judgment is, on average, better. So one, the review doesn't make you feel like you're slowing things down much, and two, the problems are less hidden.

> their judgment is, on average, better I can only presume you work with talented people somewhere that is not representative of most companies. You're definitely overestimating the average programmer's abilities.

Well, the AI's judgment (i.e. if you accept it) leads to a codebase that cannot handle evolution for more than 18-24 months or thereabouts. If you bother to look you can literally see it rotting at 5x speed (all while passing all tests, especially the ones it writes, right up until the point it collapses and cannot be saved). Since most software codebases last longer, whoever is in charge of the judgment - be they average or not - is obviously doing a far better job than today's LLMs.

Re: I'm going back to writing code by hand

#569

Post by djhn »

sadengineer22 wrote: post #566
9dev wrote: post #411

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does anyone out there working with AI coding agents not have this policy?

Depends on what is meant by "fully responsible" I guess. At my company non-engineers push code to production where the only reviewer is frequently an LLM, if the code is broken they get an LLM to fix it. The human does not understand the code, they are not even trying to, this is pure vibe coding. We also have engineers who push code to production that they have not written, and not fully read, and has not been read…

That is certifiably insane if that code touches anything that’s exposed to the internet or any PII. What kind of industries is those acceptable in?

Re: I'm going back to writing code by hand

#570

Post by LtWorf »

Phelinofist wrote: post #563
pron wrote: post #308

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, if you carefully review the agent's output, including tests, you can get good results. If you don't carefully review the output, you obviously have no idea if it's good enough for you. The only way to find out is that 30 changes down the line the agent won't be able to change one thing without breaking another, but by then the codebase will be too far gone to fix.

I get what you mean, but that can also happen with code written by humans.

Sure, by inexperienced ones.
Post reply on HN