Comment by xpe
What is the benefit of injecting one’s “take” on what level of hype exists when thinking about the OP’s exploration into agentic development?
Better to step back and just look at what exists for what it is? Strive for a less biased take.
The pieces are rapidly changing, non-standard, fragmented, and exploratory. If true, jumping in involves risks from chaos, churn, rushing, unproveness (sp?), etc
Confirmation bias can be a problem. Positivity bias as well. The author seems to take agentic dev as granted, which isn't. He doesn't goes into much detail either. It's at best a soft complaint about why it isn't plug and play already. I am open for the topic. But I demand more depth.