If you thought the speed of writing code was your problem - you have bigger problems | Debugging Leadership
debuggingleadership.com
AI coding tools are optimising the wrong thing and nobody wants to hear it. Writing code was already fast. The bottleneck is everything else: unclear requirements, review queues, terrified deploy cultures, and an org chart that needs six meetings to decide what colour the button should be.
  • MousePotatoDoesStuff@lemmy.world
    3·
    1 day ago

    That’s part why I don’t use VIM for software development, even though I love the motions.

    It’s a perfect solution… for the wrong problem.

    (Other reasons are:

    • I like the features that help me handle the code and catch mistakes before running it

    -I paid for the entire RAM and I’m going to use the entire RAM )

  • pHr34kY@lemmy.world
    37·
    2 days ago

    I’ve found the biggest bottleneck is bugs. If you catch a bug during development, it takes the least time to fix.

    Catch a bug during PR, you need to fix the code, and the PR needs to happen again.

    Catch a bug in QA, and you need to fix the code, do another PR, and get it tested again.

    This pattern goes right through UAT, and god help you when a bug makes it to Prod.

    There is nothing more time consuming than code that was written quickly.

    • curiousaur@reddthat.com
      62·
      2 days ago

      All code is written quickly these days, and not by humans. The patterns to guard against bugs also help speed development, and are the same we already learned.

      Strong typing and test driven development.

  • m532@lemmygrad.ml
    21·
    21 hours ago

    The bigger problem I have is ADHD. I can only keep the focus for a few days, then it’s over. So there’s only two possibilities for me. A: Never get anything done. B: Lower the scope and write code as fast as possible.

  • Hexarei@beehaw.org
    4·
    1 day ago

    This is why my personal use of AI has been focused pretty cleanly on “doing what I already do, more thoroughly” - By not turning it into a “ship more code more faster” machine, it’s a “can explore my code and answer questions and help design things more thoroughly” machine.

    I tend to go with “AI-augmented” development because I’m shipping the same things I’ve been shipping - Just with a way to quickly brainstorm and compare ideas on something my team members may not have time for. I can propose my ideas and have some LLM tell me what the downsides of my approach would be - or what I should guard against.

    It’s crazy to me that folks are treating them like sources of truth when they should just be an untrustworthy second opinion that is faster than you. I think of it as an intern with speed but questionable taste lol.