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

Programming is Art

orchidfiles.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 211 posts

Re: Programming is Art

#121

Post by teaearlgraycold »

quikoa wrote: post #115
bigupthewhole wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While this was true 1+ years ago, the agents don't write bad code anymore. They might not write according to your preferences, but you can also have it adjust to your style. Also, humans didn't evolve to write or read code, even the best programmers are terrible at it from an objective point of view, if we compare it to what is theoretically possible.

So why doesn't Anthropic write a good Claude Code in Rust already? Why don't we get a Codex with the polish level of Sublime text editor? These companies have many billion dollar investments and yet their main product is a bloated meh.

They don’t hand write it because it would be an embarrassment. At the same time, Claude Code doesn’t really need to be any better than it is while Anthropic has great models no one else has.

Re: Programming is Art

#122

Post by larodi »

It is a true story, though I dont remember exactly where it took place:

Once asked a favorite and very important professor who helped us start teaching, isn't, in their opinion, programming an art, given it has all markings of creative writing. She said, "yes, dear, we actually thought about it at one conference during the 70s, and concluded very much it is in fact art, but then aslo decided it is to be understood as engineering, because art would not sound too serious with the mathematicians."

:D perhaps I changed a word or two, but this was the general message. still wonder which conference this might've been. I hope she forgives me for retelling the story in such a blunt manner, from where she is in the afterlife.

Re: Programming is Art

#123

Post by canelonesdeverd »

xeyownt wrote: post #11

Why are people mixing everything up? Since when code has a soul? AI can be just a tool. You use it the same way you use a keyboard, a computer, a pencil, etc. I'm pretty sure you can build art with it, much like using any tool. People are making art with ascii. You can do art with anything. But AI can also be much more than a tool, and why can't it have a soul? What's a soul anyway, except something that humans are m…

>AI in 20 years will very likely produce art indistinguishable and as profound as human art.

If you see art only as more "content" to be mindlessly consumed, maybe.

Re: Programming is Art

#124

Post by jan_m_savage »

exitb wrote: post #65
jan_m_savage wrote: post #57

It's still too early to say what will the outlook be like in the next ten years, wrt to AI, but one thing I am perfectly sure of is: AI will always produce 'errors' due to the fundamental fact that it's heuristics-based. Maybe fewer and fewer, but the mistakes will never be totally eliminated. This is why those wanting to learn how to write software shouldn't get discouraged that 'Oh, AI will replace human programmer…

There's a class of programming/configuration tasks where I specifically use AI because it makes less errors than I do.

Yes but it will make other kinds of errors you wouldn't make.

Re: Programming is Art

#125

Post by jan_m_savage »

frotaur wrote: post #60
jan_m_savage wrote: post #57

It's still too early to say what will the outlook be like in the next ten years, wrt to AI, but one thing I am perfectly sure of is: AI will always produce 'errors' due to the fundamental fact that it's heuristics-based. Maybe fewer and fewer, but the mistakes will never be totally eliminated. This is why those wanting to learn how to write software shouldn't get discouraged that 'Oh, AI will replace human programmer…

I fail to see why this is a good argument against AI replacing humans, given that humans also produce errors.

If a human makes errors and discovers it, the error gets fixed. With AI, it usually fails to fix the error totally on first try, even on nth tries. If on the off chance it does fix it, it generates other problems.

Re: Programming is Art

#126

Post by d--b »

dust-jacket wrote: post #75
OtherShrezzing wrote: post #53

I'd say this article is a stronger argument that "programming can be a hobby" than "programming is an art". Lots of people do lots of things for enjoyment without a salary, and we tend not to call all of those things an artform. There's lots of competing definitions of art, but I don't think the article has reasonably linked programming to any of them. Maybe there's a thin & stretched link to the concept of a starvin…

100%. Hobby is the word this article was looking for. And I don't think that's less meaningful, or that there's no way people can elevate their hobby to artform. But what the article describes is people with a hobby, not an art.

Not wanting to linger on the definition of art, which is rather vague, but a lot of people will consider their hobby an art form, if there is enough room for mastery.

I mean many Japanese people consider that pouring tea can be an art form.

Re: Programming is Art

#127

Post by jan_m_savage »

CrimsonRain wrote: post #68
jan_m_savage wrote: post #57

It's still too early to say what will the outlook be like in the next ten years, wrt to AI, but one thing I am perfectly sure of is: AI will always produce 'errors' due to the fundamental fact that it's heuristics-based. Maybe fewer and fewer, but the mistakes will never be totally eliminated. This is why those wanting to learn how to write software shouldn't get discouraged that 'Oh, AI will replace human programmer…

So humans never make errors? The very same thing that allows humans to make errors, find errors, learn from it, fix it...AI can/will do too. Then what? You lack imagination.

You lack manners. That's even worse.

Re: Programming is Art

#128

Post by andai »

>They enjoy writing code, solving development challenges, designing, figuring out the logic, fixing bugs, and understanding the entire system as a whole. They enjoy the process itself. And they’ll never hand that over to AI agents.

Yeah, until they spend several years working on a game, then try vibe coding and AI makes a better one in 4 minutes. Not that I'd know anything about that.

Re: Programming is Art

#129

Post by christophilus »

tvink wrote: post #113
jeltz wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The agents still write bad code unless my colleagues and the people who submit PRs to the repos I am responsible for somehow use agents from last year. And, no, it is not a question about style or preferences, the code is messy and contains to me as a maintainer obvious bugs.

>still write bad code unless my colleagues and the people who submit PRs It's interesting you feel comfortable to comment with such authority on the capability of a tool you don't even use... Lisp is a bad programming language because my 10 year old brother wrote some really bad stuff, btw!

I use them. The top 3 models still write terrible code, regardless of harness. They’ll litter the code with safety checks for scenarios we’ve already guaranteed won’t happen. And they’ll solve problems you didn’t ask them to, and they’ll come up with a working, but convoluted solution. They’ll sometimes write really weird code if you’re using them in an obscure language.

Basically, they still need a human guiding them pretty closely unless you’re happy to just ship a mountain of vibe coded mush.

That said, I haven’t tried Astra in earnest yet. We’ll see in a few weeks whether or not it is a step change.

Re: Programming is Art

#130

Post by enos_feedler »

KurSix wrote: post #74
trashb wrote: post #46

I am (still) not a proponent for AI, however I hope AI might do to programming what the camera did to painting, and I hope that will be a good thing. What we understand as painting today is very different then what painting meant pre-camera. Now it is mostly a leisure activity and creative outlet. Where back in the day it was a serious occupation for capturing reality, and therefore creativity was taking second stage…

If software becomes dramatically cheaper to produce, that may just give investors even more software to invest in

That is the comforting idea that allows people to believe in the status quo. It is a possibility but not the likely outcome in my opinion.
Post reply on HN