Write less code, be more responsible • Hacker News Board

Re: Write less code, be more responsible

#131

Post by daotoad » Wed, Apr 15, 2026, 6:35 PM UTC

agentultra wrote: post #118

ignoramous wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Writing the code hasn’t been the bottle neck to developing software for a long time. For who? There's no lack of professional programmers who couldn't clear FizzBuzz now coding up company-sized systems using Agents. This is all good as long as agents can stick to the spec/req & code it all up with decent enough abstractions... as the professional approving it is in no position to clue it on code organization or bug…

Valid concern and one I share. If you’re going to vibe code up an operating system you will still need the experience and understanding of operating system fundamentals to have a chance at producing anything useful. The one-shot vibe-coded C compiler is a good example. Sure it created a compiler that could pass the basic tests. But it was no where near a plausible or useful compiler you’d use in a production system.…

The gap between quality work and baseline LLM output is precisely the understanding.

If it can be validated by automation, the bot will do it. But no automation suite is complete or perfect.

What concerns me is that building software using the LLMs gives a distance that inhibits the formation of the sort of understanding I need to "just know" a code base intuitively. So when product asks for a feature, my ability to be sufficiently pedantic about the 6 different non-obvious things this impacts is less effective. And when I need to choose abstractions and try to form an effective ontology, my intuition is less effective. I believe I can still grind out an effective solution, but I start farther from the finish line.

Does the LLM's ability to "answer questions" about the codebase make up for my lack of intuition? Does my apparent ability to run faster make up for the fact that I am starting farther from the end of the race?

I don't know yet.

Re: Write less code, be more responsible

#132

Post by pdimitar » Thu, Apr 16, 2026, 1:24 PM UTC

lelanthran wrote: post #129

pdimitar wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You do have a point but as the sibling comment pointed out, the negative eventuality you are describing also has not happened for many devs. I quite enjoy being much more of an architect than I could compared to 90% of my career so far (24 years in total). I have coded my fingers and eyes out and I spot idiocies in LLM output from trivially easy to needing an hour carefully reviewing. So, I don't see the "soon" in yo…

> I have coded my fingers and eyes out and I spot idiocies in LLM output from trivially easy to needing an hour carefully reviewing. This is exactly the opposite experience of sibling, who reports not seeing any issues in the generated code. You report spotting idiocies, he reports seeing nothing, and you are both making the same argument :-/

Not really. We are both reporting our own anecdotal evidence.

There are common threads though. LLMs do terribly in certain areas. They also do terribly when not supervised well.

Re: Write less code, be more responsible

#133

Post by the_overseer » Fri, Apr 17, 2026, 5:19 AM UTC

kjksf wrote: post #78

NilMostChill wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A Luddite farm worker can assist in all those things, the question is, can it assist in a useful manner?

Not only it can but it does. Just as I was reading this claude implemented a drag&drop of images out of SumatraPDF. I asked: > implement dragging out images; if we initiate drag action and the element under cursor is an image, allow dragging out the image and dropping on other applications then it didn't quite work: I'm testing it by trying to drop on a web application that accepts dropped images from file system but…

Just uninstalled Sumatra. Jesus that code is garbage.

Re: Write less code, be more responsible

#134

Post by NilMostChill » Fri, Apr 17, 2026, 12:39 PM UTC

kjksf wrote: post #78

NilMostChill wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A Luddite farm worker can assist in all those things, the question is, can it assist in a useful manner?

Not only it can but it does. Just as I was reading this claude implemented a drag&drop of images out of SumatraPDF. I asked: > implement dragging out images; if we initiate drag action and the element under cursor is an image, allow dragging out the image and dropping on other applications then it didn't quite work: I'm testing it by trying to drop on a web application that accepts dropped images from file system but…

1. I mean, yes ? the average farm worker is probably capable of writing a sentence similar to the one you just did and sicking it a prompt.

Unless you mean without LLM assistance, then no.

2. I've no idea, i haven't touched c++ in an age, if i got back up to speed then possibly.

3. To learn how to program in c++ again, figure out best practices and then write the code? A while probably.

But then i'd have to to that anyway to be able to spot any problems in the code and know what to test.

because i'm for sure not putting code out there that i don't understand, especially when the code has been generated by a non-deterministic system prone to subtle hallucinations.

I'm not saying LLM's have no uses, they do some things fine, inflating the capabilities of a tool because of hype isn't a viable mid to long term strategy.

LLM's are poor(but improving in some ways) at consistent multiple-boundary complexity.

My issue wasn't with the statement itself, just that is was very broad, hence my reply.

LLMs can assist with all of those steps, potentially, if you use them for the things they are suited for and have a plan for maintaining quality and consistency beyond "let the LLM's review and test it for me", i'd consider that professional negligence given the current SOTA.

The assistance should be subject an accurate cost/benefit analysis before implying the assistance is worthwhile, was my point.

Re: Write less code, be more responsible

#135

Post by maigret » Sat, Apr 25, 2026, 8:23 PM UTC

osm3000 wrote: post #57

__mharrison__ wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've seen some success teaching data scientists how to write better code. SWE concepts like modularity, testing, and refuse. Things that they normally ignore or choose to throw out the window. (Disclosure: I'm a corporate trainer)

I appreciate that. I am not a position though to advocate for such a change :)

Not yet, maybe.