Yeah, that’s my biggest worry. I always have to hold colleagues to the basics of programming standards as soon as they start using AI for a task, since it is easier to generate a second implementation of something we already have in the codebase, rather than extending the existing implementation.
But that was pretty much always true. We still did not slap another implementation onto the side, because it’s horrible for maintenance, as you now need to always adjust two (or more) implementations when requirements change.
And it’s horrible for debugging problems, because parts of the codebase will then behave subtly different from other parts. This also means usability is worse, as users expect consistency.
And the worst part is that they don’t even have an answer to those concerns. They know that it’s going to bite us into the ass in the near future. They’re on a sugar high, because adding features is quick, while looking away from the codebase getting incredibly fat just as quickly.
And when it comes to actually maintaining that generated code, they’ll be the hardest to motivate, because that isn’t as fun as just slapping a feature onto the side, nor do they feel responsible for the code, because they don’t know any better how it actually works. Nevermind that they’re also less sharp in general, because they’ve outsourced thinking.
Holytimes@sh.itjust.works 1 day ago
Hell most people turn off their brains when the word gets mentioned at all. There’s plenty of basic shit an ai can do exactly as good as a human. But people hear AI and instantly become the equivalent of a shit eating insect.
As long as your educated and experienced enough to know the limitations of your tools and use them accurately and correctly. Then AI is literally a non factor and about as likely to make an error as the dev themselves.
The problem with AI slop code comes from executives in high up positions forcing the use of it beyond the scope it can handle and in use cases it’s not fit for.
Lutris doesn’t have that problem.
So unless the guy suddenly goes full stupid and starts letting AI write everything the quality is not going to change. If anything it’s likely to improve as he off loads tedious small things to his more efficient tools.
echodot@feddit.uk 1 day ago
The problem is I’ve seen people who supposedly have a brain start to use a high and over time they become increasingly confident in the AI’s abilities. Then they stop bothering to review the code.
p03locke@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 day ago
This happens with human code reviews all the time.
“I don’t really understand this code, but APPROVE!”
“You need this thing merged today? APPROVE!”
“This code is too long, and it’s almost my lunch break. APPROVE!”
Over and over and over again. The worse thing you can insult me with is take code I spend days working on and approve it five minutes after I submitted it to you.
dream_weasel@sh.itjust.works 17 hours ago
20 line commit: 5 issues and suggestions.
5k line commit: “looks good to me!”
UxyIVrljPeRl@lemmy.world 23 hours ago
Do i feel bad about 10comments on my review, all with basic shit? Yes. Do i prefer that over Idiot managed to slip error surpression by review? Yes. At the end im Happy that someone looked deep enough to find my small stuff, so its not going to Master and life on for decades.
Auli@lemmy.ca 8 hours ago
That is the problem. They become dependent on it and it is human nature to be lazy. So eventually the “safe guards” well come off.