Comment by thunky
6 days ago
> Would you be so sure of this opinion if the requirement was to write "a simple CRUD app", but it had to integrate with a poorly documented legacy system and was for a big client with an SLA that could sink the business?
Yes, because I think the underlying patterns are the same. Get data, move it around, serialize/deserialize it, store, query, present. It's very unlikely I'm going to run into some new pattern that's never been seen in code before. This is exactly where I think devs are giving themselves too much credit.
I'm not saying AI can do it without my help either, I'm just saying is that it can help me do it better and faster than I could have done without it.
The majority of code isn't there to merely be functional.
I agree that you could use AI to write the core functionality from scratch... or you can choose from one of dozens of available mature libraries that people have been using for at least a decade.
> This is exactly where I think devs are giving themselves too much credit.
Nobody is trying to take credit for libs they didn't write. Unless they're working solo, they rarely take credit for the code they do write either because the ideas came from the rest of the team and broader business needs.
Developer expertise is more like that of a bureaucrat than a craftsman. That has been true for a very long time. Those who are more interested in their tools and what they can do rather than what they draft for approval have always been the weakest devs.
What's most unfortunate is when someone charismatic and lacking experience jams their ideas through and makes a mess. This is the real reason you cannot get rid of the humans. There always has to be a bigger seamless plan. Humans are better at context and have much more of it.
I never said anything about code reuse, taking credit, or approval. So I'm not sure what your points are related to.