• Vlyn
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      1 year ago

      Management and sound technical specifications, that sounds to me like you’ve never actually worked in a real software company.

      You just said what the main problem is: ChatGPT is not perfect. Code that isn’t perfect (compiles + has consistent logic) is worthless. If you need a developer to look over it you’ve already lost and it would be faster to have that developer write the code themselves.

      Have you ever gotten a pull request with 10k lines of code? The AI could spit out so much code in an instant, no developer would be able to debug this mess or do a code review. They’ll just click “Approve” and throw it on the giant garbage heap whatever the AI decided to spit out.

      If there’s a bug down the line (if you even get the whole thing to run), good luck finding it if no one in your developer team even wrote the code in the first place.

        • Vlyn
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          You misunderstood, I never said management is worthless. The product managers know what customers want. The product owners keep 8 out of 10 dumb ideas away from the development team. And management again leans on the development team to find out what is actually technically possible and in what time frame.

          If management just threw every customer wish into a magic black box to get code out, even if that code was perfect, you wouldn’t have a product. You’d have a pile of steaming crap.

          I’ve done plenty of code reviews, they only work if they are small human readable increments. Like they say: A code review of 100 lines might take an hour. A code review of 10000 lines takes thirty minutes.

          AI would spit out so much code with missing context for the developer, it would be impossible to properly review.

            • Vlyn
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              You really don’t get the issue. Give real developers pull requests with 10, 100, 1000 and 10000 lines of changed code. I promise you, 100% that the quality on the latter two pull requests will be abysmal. No matter how good you are as a developer, you can be the best of the best, after a few hundred lines of code you’re unfamiliar with you’ll overlook obvious issues.

              And let’s be honest, most developers will try to quickly get it done, read over it, hit the approve button and go back to their own work. This is how it works in the real world.

              A small pull request with 10 or at most 100 lines will get a lot more scrutiny where developers actually have the mental capacity to think and reason about the code and its context.

              If you let AI write a full system, or even a full module at once, spitting that code out, you’ll get large pull requests. Too large to do a meaningful review. It’s like if I threw you a pull request right now for a software you’re not familiar with and it’s 2000 lines of code. How well do you think you’ll do?

                • Vlyn
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  You can’t have your cake and eat it too. The entire point of AI would be to off-load the development work. You write a specification, throw it into the magic AI box, then get a working code base out.

                  Why the hell would you invest ten times the amount of organization work to break every feature down into small human sized parts? The AI doesn’t need bite sized tickets like humans do, you can throw a complex 100 page specification at it and get out working code an hour later. But you’ll get out 100k lines of code at once in that case.

                  You’re treating the AI like a junior developer, give it tiny tickets it can work on, then let a human review the work. The human will do badly because they have no context (they’d have to read the entire specification first, then read the pull request, then try to reason about code that a machine wrote). Reviewing code is always more difficult than writing it, the writing part is easy.