←back to thread

413 points martinald | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
Volundr ◴[] No.46205257[source]
FTA

> I've had Claude Code write an entire unit/integration test suite in a few hours (300+ tests) for a fairly complex internal tool. This would take me, or many developers I know and respect, days to write by hand.

I have no problem believing that Claude generated 300 passing tests. I have a very hard time believing those tests were all well thought out, consise, actually testing the desired behavior while communicating to the next person or agent how the system under test is supposed to work. I'd give very good odds at least some of those tests are subtly testing themselves (ex mocking a function, calling said function, then asserting the mock was called). Many of them are probably also testing implementation details that were never intended to be part of the contract.

I'm not anti-AI, I use it regularly, but all of these articles about how crazy productive it is skip over the crazy amount of supervision it needs. Yes, it can spit out code fast, but unless your prepared to spend a significant chunk of that 'saved" time CAREFULLY (more carefully than with a human) reviewing code, you've accepted a big drop in quality.

replies(7): >>46205349 #>>46205526 #>>46205624 #>>46206683 #>>46206705 #>>46208955 #>>46214506 #
jf22 ◴[] No.46205624[source]
> you've accepted a big drop in quality.

Right, but you do it in a 10th of the time.

replies(2): >>46205955 #>>46206771 #
WesleyJohnson ◴[] No.46205955[source]
So you're openly saying you're fine with quantity over quality.... in software engineering? That's fine for a MVP, maybe, but nothing beyond on that IMHO unless they're throw away scripts.

"Houston, we have a problem."

"Yeah, but we did it in a 10th of the time"

replies(3): >>46206575 #>>46207157 #>>46210494 #
bluesnowmonkey ◴[] No.46210494{3}[source]
Of course it's fine for any project.

There is exactly one "best" programmer in the world, and at this moment he/she is working on at most one project. Every other project in the world is accepting less than the "best" possible quality. Yes... in software engineering.

As soon as you sat down at the keyboard this morning, your employer accepted a sacrifice in quality for the sake of quantity. So did mine. Because neither one of us is the best. They could have hired someone better but they hired you and they're fine with that. They'd rather have the code you produce today than not have it.

It's the same for an AI. It could produce some code for you, right now, for nearly free. Would you rather have that code or not have it? It depends on the situation, yeah not always but sometimes it's worth having.

replies(1): >>46220938 #
1. WesleyJohnson ◴[] No.46220938{4}[source]
I didn't intend to imply "best" even in the scope of a team, let alone every software engineer in the world. But, I understand your point and it's fair.