Comment by vidarh
> Not true at all, in fact this sort of thing used to happen all the time 10 years ago, code reading APIs and generating clients...
Where is this template based code generator that can read my code, understand it, and generate a full client including a CLI, that include knowing how to format the data, and implement the required protocols?
I'm 30 years of development, I've seen nothing like it.
> I think you are missing the point as well, that's still review, that's still being on the hook.
I don't know if you're being intentionally obtuse, or what, but while, yes, you're on the hook for the final deliverable, you're not on the hook for fixing a specific instance of code, because you can just throw it away and have the AI do it all over.
The point you seem intent on missing is that the cost of throwing out the work of another developer is high, while the cost of throwing out the work of an AI assistant is next to nothing, and so where you need to carefully review a co-workers code because throwing it away and starting over from scratch is rarely an option, with AI generated code you can do that at the slightest whiff of an issue.
> Words like "skim" and "kill" are the problem here, not a solution. They point to a broken process that looks like its working...until it doesn't.
No, they are not a problem at all. They point to a difference in opportunity cost. If the rate at which you kill code is too high, it's a problem irrespective of source. But the point is that this rate can be much higher for AI code than for co-workers before it becomes a problem, because the cost of starting over is orders of magnitude different, and this allows for a very different way of treating code.
> Well, you just have to sort of hope it works and when it doesn't
No, I don't "hope it works" - I have tests.
> Where is this template based code generator that can read my code, understand it, and generate a full client including a CLI, that include knowing how to format the data, and implement the required protocols?
I'd argue you are quite a bit beyond "rote" code at that point (with the understanding and protocol bits). But, generating client code is not hard, there are numerous generators around e.g. swagger:
https://swagger.io/ https://swagger.io/tools/swagger-codegen/
In ten years I expect other generators/platforms exist too, that's merely one I'm familiar with.
> you're not on the hook for fixing a specific instance of code, because you can just throw it away and have the AI do it all over. > ... > No, I don't "hope it works" - I have tests.
These are contradictory statements. Every instance of that code you are responsible for, or you wouldn't test it and you wouldn't deign to "need" to throw it away.
> They point to a difference in opportunity cost.
Yes, we are all ultimately concerned with this. However this is not an easy metric to quantify, clearly you feel your OC (Opportunity Cost) because maybe you don't work well with other humans, ok whatever, however you are likely overestimating the supposed savings, and underestimating the lost OC of working with other developers, or simply writing code that doesn't need to be thrown out at all...