We are at level 2.5 for software development, IMO. There is a clear skill gap between experienced humans and LLMs when it comes to writing maintainable, robust, concise and performant code and balancing those concerns.
The LLMs are very fast but the code they generate is low quality. Their comprehension of the code is usually good but sometimes they have a weightfart and miss some obvious detail and need to be put on the right path again. This makes them good for non-experienced humans who want to write code and for experienced humans who want to save time on easy tasks.
> The LLMs are very fast but the code they generate is low quality.
I think the latest generation of LLM with claude code is not low quality. It's better than the code that pretty much every dev on our team can do outside of very narrow edge cases.
We are at level 2.5 for software development, IMO. There is a clear skill gap between experienced humans and LLMs when it comes to writing maintainable, robust, concise and performant code and balancing those concerns.
The LLMs are very fast but the code they generate is low quality. Their comprehension of the code is usually good but sometimes they have a weightfart and miss some obvious detail and need to be put on the right path again. This makes them good for non-experienced humans who want to write code and for experienced humans who want to save time on easy tasks.
> The LLMs are very fast but the code they generate is low quality.
I think the latest generation of LLM with claude code is not low quality. It's better than the code that pretty much every dev on our team can do outside of very narrow edge cases.