Curious where others might stand.
My day to day “coding” is reviewing, revising and running plans against LLM/code-assistant tools. I juggle around 2-3 sessions of this on various features or tasks at a time.
Curious where others might stand.
My day to day “coding” is reviewing, revising and running plans against LLM/code-assistant tools. I juggle around 2-3 sessions of this on various features or tasks at a time.
I don’t think that’d be much good when the way the specs are written are not based purely on technical merits. We also aren’t paid to test hardware - we have hardware because we develop software to test hardware on. Knowing how to navigate those waters is the key skill. Once I’ve got a solution that’ll work getting it implemented is relatively trivial as our approach is extremely atomic.
In general what you describe sounds like a tremendous amount more overhead than we currently have for little to no gain. What I could do with is a few more engineers that I could train up to have sufficient contextual knowledge, not another junior to babysit. I trained one up and he’s tremendously useful - apart from when he leans too heavily on LLMs. That cost a side project two months of unnecessary faff and sapped team morale massively in the process. I ended up dragging the damn thing over the finish line after he refactored it into something that was exhausting to work with.
Gotcha – I have no doubts that LLMs can steer things to shit at breakneck speeds.
I certainly wouldn’t mind some more (competent) employees.