It often takes me 3-4 iterations with a coding assistant once you get to a working solution, to get one that still works but is simplified down ditching >80% of needless complexity introduced in the first take.
Many stop at the first thing that works. This is totally fine for code that will run once to get a result and then be discarded. But if that code is going into a product or service that will be maintained, you have to have the knowledge and the will to push further until you have not just a working but a lean, clean and simple solution.
GIGO very much still applies.
The tech debt this title speaks of only applies if humans have to deal with it. Tech debt is an assumption made on the grounds that humans are still programming and AI does not evolve. It's the opposite of reality.
Coding agents are such a congested space right now that to me this mostly reads as an advertisement.
From the guys who don't understand that people don't like to see their questions closed as a "duplicate" of an unrelated question.
Non-native speaker here. Is the phrasing of the blog title awkward or am I the only one? Seems like they are using "10x" as a verb and my brain kept parsing "10x" as a adjective to developer, reading "10x developer" which is a already established industry lingo.
I’m so sick of “10x” everything. It’s almost always grossly overstated marketing bullshit. There are a lot more precise x’s, but everyone just rounds up and snaps to 10x. And the numbers aren’t even really ever truly measured. Thumb in the wind.
bUt AI mAkEs mE cOdE fAsTeR
how do we pay this debt?
The “craftsman to Ikea factory manager” line from the interview is the real headline here. AI does the fun creative stuff, you get stuck reviewing 2000 lines you didn’t write. Revert rate tells you more than any “10x” claim.