←back to thread

421 points briankelly | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
necovek ◴[] No.43575664[source]
The premise might possibly be true, but as an actually seasoned Python developer, I've taken a look at one file: https://github.com/dx-tooling/platform-problem-monitoring-co...

All of it smells of a (lousy) junior software engineer: from configuring root logger at the top, module level (which relies on module import caching not to be reapplied), over not using a stdlib config file parser and building one themselves, to a raciness in load_json where it's checked for file existence with an if and then carrying on as if the file is certainly there...

In a nutshell, if the rest of it is like this, it simply sucks.

replies(23): >>43575714 #>>43575764 #>>43575953 #>>43576545 #>>43576732 #>>43576977 #>>43577008 #>>43577017 #>>43577193 #>>43577214 #>>43577226 #>>43577314 #>>43577850 #>>43578934 #>>43578952 #>>43578973 #>>43579760 #>>43581498 #>>43582065 #>>43583922 #>>43585046 #>>43585094 #>>43587376 #
rybosome ◴[] No.43575714[source]
Ok - not wrong at all. Now take that feedback and put it in a prompt back to the LLM.

They’re very good at honing bad code into good code with good feedback. And when you can describe good code faster than you can write it - for instance it uses a library you’re not intimately familiar with - this kind of coding can be enormously productive.

replies(5): >>43575812 #>>43575838 #>>43575956 #>>43577317 #>>43578501 #
1. necovek ◴[] No.43575812[source]
I do plan on experimenting with the latest versions of coding assistants, but last I tried them (6 months ago), none could satisfy all of the requirements at the same time.

Perhaps there is simply too much crappy Python code around that they were trained on as Python is frequently used for "scripting".

Perhaps the field has moved on and I need to try again.

But looking at this, it would still be faster for me to type this out myself than go through multiple rounds of reviews and prompts.

Really, a senior has not reviewed this, no matter their language (raciness throughout, not just this file).

replies(1): >>43575972 #