←back to thread

196 points yuedongze | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.333s | source
Show context
blauditore ◴[] No.46195811[source]
All these engineers who claim to write most code through AI - I wonder what kind of codebase that is. I keep on trying, but it always ends up producing superficially okay-looking code, but getting nuances wrong. Also fails to fix them (just changes random stuff) if pointed to said nuances.

I work on a large product with two decades of accumulated legacy, maybe that's the problem. I can see though how generating and editing a simple greenfield web frontend project could work much better, as long as actual complexity is low.

replies(16): >>46195970 #>>46195979 #>>46196044 #>>46196111 #>>46196149 #>>46196181 #>>46196747 #>>46197925 #>>46198024 #>>46198073 #>>46198272 #>>46198478 #>>46199426 #>>46200435 #>>46202288 #>>46207763 #
1. moomoo11 ◴[] No.46198073[source]
You need to realize when you’re being marketed to and filter out the nonsense.

Now I use agentic coding a lot with maybe 80-90% success rate.

I’m on greenfield projects (my startup) and maintaining strict Md files with architecture decisions and examples helps a lot.

I barely write code anymore, and mostly code review and maintain the documentation.

In existing codebases pre-ai I think it’s near impossible because I’ve never worked anywhere that maintained documentation. It was always a chore.