← Back to context

Comment by AdieuToLogic

8 days ago

The premise is flawed:

  Now that we have software that can write working code ...

While there are other points made which are worth consideration on their own, it is difficult to take this post seriously given the above.

15 comments

AdieuToLogic

Reply
simonw  8 days ago

If you haven't seen coding agents produce working code you've not been paying attention for the past 3-12 months.

  • Eufrat  8 days ago

    I get the impression there’s a very strong bimodal experience of these tools and I don’t consider that an endorsement of their long-term viability as they are right now. For me, I am genuinely curious why this is. If the tool was so obviously useful and a key part of the future of software engineering, I would expect it to have far more support and adoption. Instead, it feels like it works for selected use cases very well and flounders around in other situations.

    This is not an attack on the tech as junk or useless, but rather that it is a useful tech within its limits being promoted as snake oil which can only end in disaster.

    • simonw  8 days ago

      My best guess is that the hype around the tooling has given the false impression that it's easy to use - which leads to disappointment when people try it and don't get exactly what they wanted after their first prompt.

      1 reply →

  • AdieuToLogic  8 days ago

    > If you haven't seen coding agents produce working code you've not been paying attention for the past 3-12 months.

    If you believe coding agents produce working code, why was the decision below made?

      Amazon orders 90-day reset after code mishaps cause
  millions of lost orders[0]

    0 - https://www.businessinsider.com/amazon-tightens-code-control...