Live data from Hacker News

Coding after coders: The end of computer programming as we know it?

nytimes.com

191–200 of 469 posts

Re: Coding after coders: The end of computer programming as we know it?

#191

I'm from an accounting/finance background and spent about 10 years in Big4. I was always into tech, but never software development because writing code (as I thought) takes years to master, and I had already chosen accounting. Fast forward to 2024 when I saw Cursor (the IDE coding agent tool). I immediately felt like this was going to be the way for someone like me. Back then, it was brutal. I'd fight with the models…

> it still takes a lot of trial and error to develop intuition about how to use them well. I used to think so. Then a customer made their own replacement for $600/mo software in 2 days. The guy was a marketer by training. I don't exaggerate. I saw it did the exact same things.

It’s true there’s some magic effect from Claude code’s work. But still, often it’s not exactly the same infra and scaling than production grade. But for a customer I guess that’s perfect, they have a mean to make their own tools instead of relying on platforms to build those tools.

Re: Coding after coders: The end of computer programming as we know it?

#192

Having an AI is like having a dedicated assistant or junior programmer that sometimes has senior-level insights. I use it to do tedious tasks where I don't care about the code - like today I used it to generate a static web page that let me experiment with the spring-ai chat bot code I was writing - basic. But yesterday it was able to track down the cause of a very obscure bug having to do with a pom.xml loading two…

>I think though that the day is coming where I can trust the code it produces and at that point I'll just by writing specs. It's not there yet though. Must be nice to still have that choice. At the company I work for they've just announced they're cancelling all subscriptions to JetBrains, Visual Studio, Windsurf, etc. and forcing every engineer to use Claude Code as a cost-saving measure. We've been told we should b…

Thoughts and prayers.

Re: Coding after coders: The end of computer programming as we know it?

#193

[flagged]

At least at my company, we have never really cared how it gets done, even before AI. It just has to work (ideally bug-free and maintainable) by the deadline. If you can keep up with shorter deadlines, more power to you. It’s basically a modern John Henry vs the steam drill.

Re: Coding after coders: The end of computer programming as we know it?

#194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've generated 250KLoC this week, absolutely no changes in deps or any other shenanigans. I'm not even really trying to optimize my output. I work on plans/proposals with 2 or 3 agents simultaneously in Cursor while one does work, sometimes parallelized. I can't do that in less code and cleaner. I can't do it at all. Don't wait too long.

LOL that's it? I generated over 5 million lines of code this week. You need to step it up or you're gonna be left behind.

I left an agent generating code over the weekend, so that I can get to 15 million.

What code? Code!

Re: Coding after coders: The end of computer programming as we know it?

#195

Having an AI is like having a dedicated assistant or junior programmer that sometimes has senior-level insights. I use it to do tedious tasks where I don't care about the code - like today I used it to generate a static web page that let me experiment with the spring-ai chat bot code I was writing - basic. But yesterday it was able to track down the cause of a very obscure bug having to do with a pom.xml loading two…

>I think though that the day is coming where I can trust the code it produces and at that point I'll just by writing specs. It's not there yet though. Must be nice to still have that choice. At the company I work for they've just announced they're cancelling all subscriptions to JetBrains, Visual Studio, Windsurf, etc. and forcing every engineer to use Claude Code as a cost-saving measure. We've been told we should b…

Even if you're using Claude, canceling the IDEs might be poor strategy. Steve Yegge points out in his book that the indexing and refactoring tools in IDEs are helpful to AIs as well. He mentions JetBrains in particular as working well with AI. Your company's IDE savings could be offset by higher token costs.

Re: Coding after coders: The end of computer programming as we know it?

#196

If coding truly becomes effortless to produce - and by that extension a product becomes near free to produce - then I find it quite odd that the executive class thinks their businesses won’t be completely up ended by a raging sea of competition.

All run of the mill software is gone or on borrowed time. Why pay a subscription for a product that I can get something Claude to build it for me. Before I was building tools, now I am building full applications in less time than I did before for tools. What will be around for a while is where you need an expert in the loop to drive the AI. For example enterprise applications. You simply can't hand that off to an AI…

no one wants your vibecoded full applications though. not sure why you are building them.

Re: Coding after coders: The end of computer programming as we know it?

#197

I'm starting to find the naive techno-optimism here annoying. If you don't have capital or can do something else you will be homeless.

Yep. I own a software shop and yesterday was when I realized that I'm no longer going to be a 1%er doing this.

what happened yesterday?

Re: Coding after coders: The end of computer programming as we know it?

#198
post #141

I'm starting to find the naive techno-optimism here annoying. If you don't have capital or can do something else you will be homeless.

Well, there are so many more lower hanging fruits that LLMs can actually replace before they get to developers -- basically every middle manager, and a significant chunk of all white collar jobs. I'm not convinced software developers will be replaced - probably less will be needed and the exact work will be transformed a bit, but an expert human still has to be in the loop, otherwise all you get is a bunch of nonsens…

I don’t see middle managers taking the initial brunt unless they truly are just pushing papers around. At companies of sufficient size, they do play a role of separation between C suite and the grunts. To me, certain low-performing grunts will be the first out. Then a team reorg to rebalance. Then some middle managers will be out as fewer of them can handle multiple teams.

Re: Coding after coders: The end of computer programming as we know it?

#199

I'm from an accounting/finance background and spent about 10 years in Big4. I was always into tech, but never software development because writing code (as I thought) takes years to master, and I had already chosen accounting. Fast forward to 2024 when I saw Cursor (the IDE coding agent tool). I immediately felt like this was going to be the way for someone like me. Back then, it was brutal. I'd fight with the models…

> it still takes a lot of trial and error to develop intuition about how to use them well. I used to think so. Then a customer made their own replacement for $600/mo software in 2 days. The guy was a marketer by training. I don't exaggerate. I saw it did the exact same things.

It's true. We're also at the point where the models and the orchestration around them are so good that any beginner to those tools who knows how to use a computer can build working apps. Interesting times.

I was pointing out that practice helps with the speed and the scope of capabilities. Building a personal prototype is a different ballgame than building a production solution that others will use.

Re: Coding after coders: The end of computer programming as we know it?

#200

Having an AI is like having a dedicated assistant or junior programmer that sometimes has senior-level insights. I use it to do tedious tasks where I don't care about the code - like today I used it to generate a static web page that let me experiment with the spring-ai chat bot code I was writing - basic. But yesterday it was able to track down the cause of a very obscure bug having to do with a pom.xml loading two…

This is the take when you haven't really tried driving these tools with much practice

I don't think it's that

Here's an example from Gemini with some Lua code:

    label = key:gsub("on%-", ""):gsub("%-", " "):gsub("(%a)([%w_']*)", function(f, r) 
      return f:upper() .. r:lower() 
    end)

    if label:find("Click") then
      label = label:gsub("(%a+)%s+(%a+)", "%2 %1")
    elseif label:find("Scroll") then
      label = label:gsub("(%a+)%s+(%a+)", "%2 %1")
    end
I don't know Lua too well (which is why I used AI) but I know programming well enough to know this logic is ridiculous.

It was to help convert "on-click-right" into "Right Click".

The first bit of code to extract out the words is really convoluted and hard to reason about.

Then look at the code in each condition. It's identical. That's already really bad.

Finally, "Click" and "Scroll" are the only 2 conditions that can ever happen and the AI knew this because I explained this in an earlier prompt. So really all of that code isn't necessary at all. None of it.

What I ended up doing was creating a simple map and looked up the key which had an associated value to it. No conditions or swapping logic needed and way easier to maintain. No AI used, I just looked at the Lua docs on how to create a map in Lua.

This is what the above code translated to:

    local on_event_map = {
      ["on-click"] = "Left Click",
      ["on-click-right"] = "Right Click",
      ["on-click-middle"] = "Middle Click",
      ["on-click-backward"] = "Backward Click",
      ["on-click-forward"] = "Forward Click",
      ["on-scroll-up"] = "Scroll Up",
      ["on-scroll-down"] = "Scroll Down",
    }

    label = on_event_map[key]
IMO the above is a lot clearer on what's happening and super easy to modify if another thing were added later, even if the key's format were different.

Now imagine this. Imagine coding a whole app or a non-trivial script where the first section of code was used. You'd have thousands upon thousands of lines of gross, brittle code that's a nightmare to follow and maintain.

Post reply on HN